General’s Dress Code Confusion

Q.Isa Daudpota sahib! nice to hear your views, what i would like to know though is , besides the dress what is your idea of the generals govrnance at the moment and who is the other best man to lead this nation in making?

stuka #46 I was not thinking of diplomts but of the chowk interactors (the india-pakistan warrior kind) - they are not here in the capacity of diplomats whose job requires them to toe the government line. Rather, they are like birds that live in a cage made by their own unthinking minds. So, they too toe the government line just as if they were timid government officials.

As for government policy formulation, this of course depends on the context. In dictatorships it is quite clear whose interest is first and foremost. Although even here, the victims themselves (the ordinary public) start equating the dictator`s self-interest with the national interest. And even in democracies, special interest groups often set the agenda for specific issues that are often counter to the broader interests of that society.

It all comes down to the question of ``Whose interest is being promoted?`` by a given government policy. A moments reflection would indicate that there is complete lack of clarity here. Clearly the interest should be of all individuals, living or as yet not born. The implication for government policy is to stick to legal and economic regulatory frameworks, and to channel tax resources to the one activity that provides the largest social benefits, namely education. Territorial disputes of the Kashmir kind will then become trivial issues since international borders would be no more significant to the individual than state or provincial borders are today.

``Thus, to my mind a Pakistani who talks about ``The right of self determination of Kashmiris`` or and Indian who talks about ``Kashmir is an integral part of Kashmir`` is merely an unthinking fellow who merely toes the government line. ``

Depends on who is saying it and in what capacity. A diplomat may have his private thoughts but he or she is not there to put across personal perspectives. Rather the job is to toe the government line. Your statement is correct wrt common people, but don`t or should not have a role to play in interstate relations.

Regarding the official line of the government, well that is sually not decided by an individual unless it is an absolute dictatorship. Even in a dictatorship there are are various centres of power and nationalinterest is or should be defined by consensus.

stuka #44 Agreed that interstate relations have nothing to do with individual interactions. Thus, to my mind a Pakistani who talks about ``The right of self determination of Kashmiris`` or and Indian who talks about ``Kashmir is an integral part of Kashmir`` is merely an unthinking fellow who merely toes the government line. Since both government positions are (as one can conclude with a few moments reflection) disingenuous.

I dont think there is any ``Pakistani mindset`` vs. an ``Indian mindset`` though. What we have are differences in the social, political, economic environment surrounding the respective decision-makers in each country. Generally, a guy who gets to be a decision maker is no dummy - its just that he is not selfless either, and sets national policy around is self interest (which may be enlightened, and he is thinking of future generations; or which may be short-sighted, as in case of our Zia for example, who gained a few years of power for himself, and an eternity of shame and disgrace for himself as well. And set back Pakistan by a generation). And that is why national decisions and positions generally have very little to do with the calibre of the people of that country.

TAhmed:

LOL

``Pakistanis and Chinese tend to get along very well individually as well. ``

So do Indians and Pakistanis at the individual level...which basically proves that inter-state relations have nothing to do with individual interactions.

In fact your post itself is a good example of the Ppakistani mindeset towards international relations. I think Pakistanis tend to view inter-state relations as an extension of individual friendships. The Chinese are the complete opposite. The Indians are in between, bouts of pragmatism liberally intersperesed with emotionalism. A good example..due to ``emotional ties`` India agreed to pay Russia, USSR`s successor state, outstanding loans of roubles as per a fixed dollar conversion ration rather then the market rate.

arjun: #41 You write ``Yada, yada, yada``. This explains what I have always suspected from your high pitched posts: that you are in fact a specimen of the Alouatta Palliata (aka the African Howling Monkey).

When I need to know more about the the AP family, I shall seek your input since you would know what you are talking about. Aside from that, your opinions are of no interest to me.

stuka #37 I think Pakistan is a good example of why war is too important to be left to the generals. Pakistan`s Afghan policy during the power vacuum following the Soviet retreat was primarily the creation of Zia, and his policies were primarily driven by cold calculations to stay in power. The ISI simply continued his legacy after he died. Thus, the moral is that while civilian politicians are beholden to some extent to the broad interest of the country (since they do have the next elections to worry about), generals do not. I look forward to the day when the military generals stop acting as if they have a right to set foreign policy for Pakistan.

The China Pakistan friendship is, as you indicate, an interesting case. While this may sound strange given their vastly different cultural backgrounds and linguistic barriers, Pakistanis and Chinese tend to get along very well individually as well. It is easy to see why: Chinese (the government officials who come to Pakistan at least - not the less educated ones small businessmen types in the US) tend to be really nice, civilized people. I once taught english to Chinese students in Pakistan, and it was a pleasure to see how dedicated and courteous they were. A similar rapport developed at higher levels in Pakistan all the way to Chou En Lai (I dont know how relations are with current leaders). My father once headed an international language institute in Pakistan with teachers from different countries, and he was always praising the Chinese for their dedication and undemanding nature (the persian guy, on the other hand e.g., came to work in a huge car, was demanding air conditioners and things all the time - he did have really cute neices though whom he left in my charge to get admitted at Panjab University, thus making me immediately popular with fellows I had never heard from before...but I guess I better stop rambling now).

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

faisaluno:

First of all, no one is accusing you of being a racist. Those who are prejudiced let people know in a subtle yet unmistakable manner, and they know who they are.

Second, I am not disagreeing with the use of force to straighten out Altaf and his goons. MQM had become too big for its shoes and had turned against the very people it was supposed to be representing. To that extent, I agree that someone had to use the danda mercilessly to cut them to their size. I, myself, never supported the MQM because I never believed in ethnic or sectarian divisions.

However, a lot more went on under this facade. A civilized society does not lock up an entire neighorhood just to nab a few culprits. Daily confiscations of cars by the Rangers, undue harassment by the police, fake encounters, rounding up of entire neighborhoods, etc. These are just a few examples of how the law exceeded its mandate.

If Babar was indeed the superheroe some folks are portraying him as, he would have turned his attention to the real source of civic unrest in Karachi - police brutality and corruption. But, then of course, its a lot easier to use the danda on poor hapless people than taking on a tyrannical ruler.

faisaluno #34 you write ``the dose of tough love handed out to us by gen. baber was good for us much in the same way as the medicine handed out by uncle sam to pushtoons who went to fight for taliban.``

While harsh in certain ways (particularly towards the poor), Pakistani society is, ironically, quite permissive when it comes to tolerating lawlessness. A strong ``law and order`` administration is equated not with the curbing of such lawlessness but with some form of ``colonial oppression``. And yet, law and order is essential to a civilized society. As such I basically agree with what you say here, even though I have no doubt that it will ruffle the feathers on some people on chowk.

Faisaluno:

``and to expect pak to stay out of afghanistan is akin to expecting americans to stay out cuba or israel.``

I disagree completely with that statement. Pakistan simply does not have the size or power to completely influence Afghanistan without expecting blowback. Besides, if Pakistan has the right, then so does Iran, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan etc and by extension India.


``even then, i believe taliban could have been controlled (meaning their religious zealotry could have been reduced) had it not been for the noxious influence of afghan-arabs. ``

Disagree again. Taliban`s legitimacy was derived from religion and religion alone. I agree with your statement that the Taliban was spwned at a time when warlords were battling it out for self interest. But those warlords derived legitimacy from ethnic/tribal affiliation. The Taliban were Pashtun there ethnic loyalty was limited. Also, within the Pushtun, those who commanded tribal affililiations had no need for Babur. Therefore, if Babur was to create a new movement, he was pretty limited to using religion. He had no choice.

In hindsight, Pakistan was much better of with russian dominated communists in Kabul compared to what came later. Ofcourse that depends on your point of view of what constitutes ``better``.

TAhmed:

``Now why would such a guy support the Taliban badmaash?? I guess no one is perfect. ``

It is as unfair to blame Babar today for the creation of the Taliban as it is to blame America for creation of Al Qaeda when it was simply sending money/arms to Mujahideen. Babar created the Taliban when Afghanistan was a right royal mess. Problem was the tiger became too big.

Problem with Pakistani GHQ is that they are too rigid in policy implementation. Thinking is limited to immediate consequences rather than looking at complete strategic picture. A policy that makes sense in 1989 may not make sense in 1999 if the environment is changing. But that is the inherent weakness of Pakistani planning, the military mindset dominates and is unable to comprehend and internalize non military factors. If you look at China, they clearly objectify limited goals, and in cohesion, utilize economic military and traditional diplomacy to achieve goals. Also, they retain complete flexibility not only about the means but also the ends. Interesting to see that whereas China and Pakistan are good friends they are complete opposites in terms of national character. Pragmatism versus emotionalism.

Faisaluno:

``this also my criticism of gen musharrif. that he also a lot of talk and very little action. ``

I agree. Ideally, I do believe that there should be a democracy. But if there ain`t, then why the hell does Mush talk about ``pragmatism with the Choudharys of Gujrat`` , referendum etc. Go ahead and do what ou can do.

Here`s my take...Pakistan has never been a true dictatorship. OTOH, at non democratic times it has been an oligarchy. Even now, Mush rules, it is with the consent of the Corp commanders. So there are two possibilities, either the corp commanders do genuinely still hold some brief for policies that have officially been discredited by the Pak Army, or Mush is playing a double game...using America to pressure domestic opposition and using MMA and set ups like Gen Aziz to play the US.

BTW, if the Democrats win, Mush will actually have a much less understading recipient in the White House. The Republicans are more understanding of the domestic compulsions dicatators may face.

Faisaluno:

``kamran shafi is a poor man`s naseerullah baber.``

Hmm, I am quite familiar with Babar. But why compare him to Kamran Shafi? Isn`t Shafi just a columnist? Or does he hold an official position as well?

adnan-rafiq and aliya bibi:

not only am i a mohajir myself, but those neighborhood adnan mentions, i know them like the back of my hand cause i spent my childhood playing tape-ball cricket in those gullies. (my school report cards can back me up on this). so if anything, i should be accused of being an uncle tom rather than being a racist. and yet i will tell you that the dose of tough love handed out to us by gen. baber was good for us much in the same way as the medicine handed out by uncle sam to pushtoons who went to fight for taliban. our people, when they choose leaders like altaf bhai over other good alternatives need to be held accountable. and unfortunately sometimes, accountability necessitates use of danda. and btw my most of my family and friends who live in that part of town were grateful for the steps taken by gen. baber. and if you compare life in those localities at the height of insurgency (before army moved in) with life in those localities now, you will agree with their point of view. this is however not to hold paki state blameless. but i would rather see the use of danda in a ham-handed manner than not see the danda used at all.

re #32 arjun_m

I think its time for your medicine. Shaabaash, get your daily dose first and then come back here.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

re: #29

Aliya: Kyaa yaad dilaadiyaa?

I still remember the dark days of Naseer-ullah Babur. In those days the only crime you had to commit was RMWM (riding motorbikes while being mohajir). The ``Babar Goons``, aka Rangers, had made a habit of stopping any Suzuki Swift on the road, and upon finding that its owners were mohajirs, they would promptly confiscate the car. This happend to my father-in-law, my uncle and several of my cousins. And, god forbid, if you were a student who happened to be riding a motorbike, you could kiss your ass goodbye.

I still remember the day I was visiting my aunt in North Nazimabad Block J. My uncle made us hide in the basement because the army truck was stopping door to door picking up young boys between 15 - 25 indiscriminately. Both of his sons were brilliant students with no ties to MQM or whatsoever. Their only crime was being mohajir.

I still remeber the hot summer days in Karachi. There was not a drop coming out of the taps. Yet, one could see the yellow NLC trucks racing past our houses to fill up the tanks of some major or general like Naseer ullah Babar. You see, their wives remembered the lush green lawns of Islamabad and wanted to create the same tranquility in Karachi.

I still remember the day when my cousin came back from the hospital. The police had given him a brutal `Naseer ullah Babar` reminder on his back. His crime? Drinking Coca-Cola outside a shop while being mohajir. This guy was an A-level student. A mama`s boy. As soon as he got better, he joined MQM, much to the chagrin of his parents. But, I guess the hurt and humiliation was burning him inside out.

There is no denying that the ranks of MQM were filled by goons, chief among them was their leader Altaf Hussein. The reign of terror, the violence, bloody skirmishes fought on the streets of Karachi by APMSO, provided ample justification for army intervention in my view. However, the net casted by Naseer ullah Babar was much too wide. It reeked of extreme prejudice not different from what Hitler felt about the Jews. Too bad, those who praise this racist, have never had their uncles or cousins beaten to `a pulp` by him.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Non verbal cues (such as dress etc) are more important and are more clearly heard compared with what is said. What he wears is only a reflection of the prevalent lack of ingenuity. You can expect anything from the producers and directors of the ‘referendum’, which the General won with overwhelming majority.

At the same time, if you consider the source of General’s power, it would probably become easier to understand why he wore a military uniform. When the military wins, the General wins – you know- win win situation.

Pakistan is hostage to this mindset. As Isa#26 himself says, “In the end it is irrelevant what garb the general appears in, but it is important to realize that our salvation lies in being totally honest with ourselves and others. Such an awakening will help solve our many problems - both within and with the rest of the world”

Re;tahmed:

This is nothing to do with the article, however, since tahmed was admiring babur`s treatment of mqm, As someone who usually denounces MQM, I can`t help but point out some historical facts.
1.babur`s reign was known as reign of terror for mohajirs as he pulled young men of a mohajir ethnicity from their home quite indiscriminately and tortured/ killed them in a way that was no different than the Taliban tactics. He bred hatred in a disenfranchised people rather than manipulate them in a clever fashion, something that was done after him.
2.MQM was not squashed by babur, it remains active in politics as late as the last election, it`s representatives got elected to various political seats/ positions.
3. As clear from innumerable examples in contemporary world, ``squashing`` any popular movement with force generally strenghthens it`s violent components.What truly weakend mqm was it`s split into 2 factions, now whoever did that should take credit for the change.

tahmed sahib:

that is quite an interesting little story. thank you for sharing it. with regards to your comments on taliban, i think picture is a bit more complicated than the one you are painting. afghanistan, by the time taliban took over, had turned into a country out of a mad max movie. first, russians for no rhyme or reason and with active connivance of americans killed a million afghans. and after them, the brave mujahideen, remnants of which are in currently in power killed fifty thousand of their own besides pretty much destroying all the infrastructure needed to lead a civilized existence. also important to remember that inter-mujahideen conflict was an out-and-out power struggle rather than an ethnic conflict. in this environment therefore, it was not surprising to see the rise of taliban rather than some sort of jeffersonian democrats. and to expect pak to stay out of afghanistan is akin to expecting americans to stay out cuba or israel. even then, i believe taliban could have been controlled (meaning their religious zealotry could have been reduced) had it not been for the noxious influence of afghan-arabs. and i dont think we are out of the woods by any means. the threat to our western flank should a civil war arise in afghanistan is huge. but as usual, our leaders remain asleep at the wheel.

and you paki haters out there, before you start cursing my family and insulting my god for pointing out what is essentially the truth, read what cia has to say about recent history of afghanistan:

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/af.html

Afghanistan`s recent history is characterized by war and civil unrest. The Soviet Union invaded in 1979, but was forced to withdraw 10 years later by anti-Communist mujahidin forces supplied and trained by the US, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and others. Fighting subsequently continued among the various mujahidin factions, giving rise to a state of warlordism that eventually spawned the Taliban.

A little elaboration on what I intended to convey may help...

The general`s attempt to send messages through his dress fools no one. I wish one of his minions would tell him that. It in fact shows personal (perhaps national?) insecurity about how he/we behave with ``others``.

In the end it is irrelevant what garb the general appears in, but it is important to realise that our salvation lies in being totally honest with ourselves and others. Such an awakening will help solve our many problems - both within and with the rest of the world.

Isa Daudpota
Monday 18 Aug 2003. 0010 hours

faisaluno #23 babar is indeed an interesting fellow. In 1965, his pilot mistook some Indian soldiers for Pakistanis, and landed his helicopter in the middle of them. Babar stepped out, realized the problem, and...took charge. He scolded the soldiers for not obeying their superior`s orders and surrendering to the Pakistani forces (then on a roll in Chhamb-Jaurian), and singlehandedly walked them (all 50 of the Indian soldiers) back as POWs over to the Pakistani lines. Given his presence of mind and personal courage, I was not surprised when he took on the goons of MQM a few decades later, and had the scum whining ``foul`` in no time. As minister, he lived simply in his own house in Islamabad as I recall being told.
Now why would such a guy support the Taliban badmaash?? I guess no one is perfect.

stuka #17 So I missed the one about ``Mushy the fierce Baluch tribesman``. My loss I guess. ;-)

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

stuka:

kamran shafi is a poor man`s naseerullah baber. (bb`s int. minister in her second stint).he is all talk and no action. naseerullah baber on the other hand, single handedly took on mqm --one of the most destructive forces in paki politics-- and beat it to an inch of its pulp. and not only that, but he did this in some style. with my own eyes, i saw him driving around in a white `86 corolla and in a white shalwar kameez, on the streets of karachi during the the height of mqm insurgency with only his driver as his guard. and btw, until it became politically incorrect to do so, gen. baber openly claimed credit for creation of taliban. and if you believe the friday times (which i do), taliban rewarded gen baber by giving him a couple of two thousand five hundred year old statues of buddha that were a part of kabul`s museum.

btw this also my criticism of gen musharrif. that he also a lot of talk and very little action. and if he is really a patriot as he so often claims, he should then show some balls and hire gen baber and give him a free rein to take on criminals masquerading as politicians. and top of this list would some of our religious leaders. and i also wonder why g.w. does not give mush this advice. perhaps you being the resident republican can shed some light on this.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Naqshbandi...

The question is not `why not`... but the question is why should it be a Law? I love Shalwar Qameez but does that mean we should make it a law that everyone has to wear shalwar. Why should everything become a law...

This is what people like you don`t understand ...

-Manto

``In photos flashed across the world you have the simply dressed Indians peaceniks in their saris and kurta-pajamas and in their midst Pakistan’s president in his army khakis.``(Daudpota)

I cannot believe how stupid this army man is -- strutting like a peacock in a military uniform among the civilian doves of peace!!!!

but then again-- what can you say about an imbecile mind that could concieve something so stupid like Kargil -- or a Dimwit General who ran over his very own country just to save his 10 cent job -- the man must be forgiven for being a third rate uniformly uniformed MORONIC EGOMANIAC.

``Was this intentional or mere carelessness?``

neither -- as they say in Persian: naishe aqrub nu uz paye keeN ust -- muqtazaey tabeetush eeN ust

the man is built a fool

manto ji -- please do not put words into my mouth;

shalwar kameez is universally recognised as Pakistani national costume

---

so why shouldnt our leaders wear it?

(as for beards/amamah--there is nothing wrong with that either--infact it is noble and a Sunnah--and our identity IS as Muslims primarily BUT i didn`t say make these 2 compulsory BUT I do think shalwar kameez should be.)

Well if we ARE going to emulate anyone in dress who better than the Blessed Prophet, the Best of Creation himself (upon him be peace); that is inifinitely preferable to aping US fashions (for example).

``Our Mushy by contrast, has only two outfits: Mushy the Commando, and Mushy the Western Gentleman. ``

TAhmed

Guess you did not follow the referendum as closely as I did. I saw Mushi the Baluch, Mushy the Pathan etc. :)

Faisaluno: I didn`t get the gist if your post to Arjun. What about Kamran Shafi? I think hr is a good writer though there was an unseemly argument between him and this author who lives in DC (forgetting his name) over Mushahid Hussain.

``indian and pakistani so called ``elites`` have a level of mental slavery and inferiority complexes vis-a-vis the West which is mind-boggling.``

All our politicians wear their local dress. India does not have a ``national`` dress.

I am reminded of Saddam who seemed to have a larger wardrobe than all the Barbie dolls of the world put together: Saddam the Commando; Saddam the Arab Sheikh; Saddam the English Gentleman; Saddam the Playboy; Saddam the Pious Haji.

Our Mushy by contrast, has only two outfits: Mushy the Commando, and Mushy the Western Gentleman.

Lets hope Mushy gradually relinquishes power of his own accord to the elected representative, and thus never has to put on the latest outfit awaiting Saddam: that of the jailbird.

Has anyone read Ghulam Abbas`s `Hotel Mohenjodaro`?

I think he envisaged Naqshbandi like characters way back in the 1960s...

Yes... Naqshbandi why not make it a law to make all of them have beards as well and all the women to wear Hijabs and Burqahs? But the problem is what are you going to do with the paintings and photos of the clean shaven founder of the nation wearing saville row suits?
I suppose the science of computer graphics can be used to alter the face of the founder of the nation in retrospect... but why bother with all of that... While we are at it, why not change the founder of the nation as well?

I vote for Ala Hazrat or Maudoodi as the new founder of the nation, Arabic ammamah as our new national dress, and black burqah for all women!!!

That will show the world that we Pakistanis are a proud nation...

hey arjun_m:

not surprisingly, your inability to find an outlet for your problems at home is now beginning to have an effect on your mind. this week for instance, you have forgotten to post kamran shafi`s column. bad mistake since the last three lines of his last column are the finest he is is ever written. no harm done however since we are a pretty easy going lot and we are willing to forgive and forget. however, please make sure that this does not happen again. and do please post that column and dont forget to highlight the last three lines.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

The General`s mission and objectives revolve around his uniform without which he would be powerless and would lose the trust the defenders of the nation have put in him. It is all so obvious. To recommend a removal of uniform and slip in a casual attire would make a lot of other things and issues to be tackled casual.

The current world situation puts Pakistan in a pretty uneasy position. The entire population relies on the Pakistan Army for their security and defense, be it from across the border or across the oceans. The flashing commando uniform on television screens delivers a clear message by the Pakistan Army. To say that he is doing wrong and is being a disgrace to the army is not always good.

The people should give him a chance, they should give everyone a chance.

i think it should be law that every pakistani who is in the government and civil service should have to wear our national dress of shalwar kameez whilst at work. this would include the PM, president, MNA, MPAs etc.

it shows pride in one`s nation. look at the iranians for example, their leaders always wear beautiful long robes with turbans and look so elegant. (not that i support them in a lot of things but on this dress issue they are right on.) even the american puppet in afghanistan mr. karzai at least has the self respect to wear afghani dress. the american puppet in pakistan however thinks he is more civilised by wearing either suit and trousers or his army uniform.

indian and pakistani so called ``elites`` have a level of mental slavery and inferiority complexes vis-a-vis the West which is mind-boggling. it is almost as if the british were still directly ruling india and pakistan. the tragedy for india and pakistan is that these so called `elite classes` have always held power in our countries.

Re : Article
“[Given that the army pretty much rules this country, no one objects to seeing these middle-aged uniformed men sitting around a long table, listening to the General.]”

Just curious which aspect of your country does your army not rule.

If you ask me the General wears his uniform to tell everyone he is no goddamn civilian! Don’t mess with him.


Faruk

The General is a liberal and progressive man... why then doesn`t he understand the enormous blunders he is making at this crucial juncture...

Musharraf`s coup was illegal... his manipulation of the body politic of the country is immoral... he has a chance to redeem himself... Allow for a genuine electoral process, and let the people decide who really should rule the country... If he does that, he will go down in history as the one Pakistani general who rose from the ashes to redeem himself ..

If the General wants to wear commando fatigue in front of Indian civilians in friendly atmosphere then it is fine with us, it is something refreshing. because last time we Indians faced a Khakhiwala, he was signing some document in Dacca.

{Pull out your kurta-shalwar (or a cotton safari), General, and be comfortable! }

he never looks comfortable in anything he wears anyway. . .nor should he. but he will pretend to be comfortable for as long as we let him.

Musharaf is trying to stick to the uniform by the skin of his teeth.

Without the uniform, he is a non-entity, illegal of the posts that he is clinging to and a violater of the constitution.

Unwisely, he has already delayed his exit - with the prospects of an honourable exit diminishing by the day.

Like his predecessor Generals, his tenure may also eventually result in a serious damage to the body politic of the state.