The Door To The Barracks

The Punjabi politicians, who sell themselves for petty favours, are to be blamed for this.

times and times again...

Such topics creep up..

and End result... Nothing...

Bottom Line.. Even after 55 years No civilan is Capable of getting out of these

shakles..... the assemblies only have four Kinds.. Cats, Dogs, Puppies, and Pimps

in them.


They are FAR FAR behind , Non of them Had any Ability or capability to get out.


so the stark reality..

Lets stop beating the Bush.. and get on with Life.

Dear Mr. Khan,
Why blame the poor politicians, you would find it hard to convince even me that the Pakistani military`s intrusion into politics is against their best interests! In fact, looking back at history, military rule seems to be more the rule than the exception. It is only after some major event like the 1971 defeat, or Zia`s sudden death that the army has been forced to make way for civilians. But these exits don`t last very long, and the fact that the army keeps wanting to come back suggests that there are some long term advantages that they preceive from staying in power. Assuming that you don`t think the army is full of complete fools, I am therefore not sure how one can accept your basic proposition.

You make two arguments why military rule may be against the army`s long term interests. (1) becoz after a while civil society would want the army out (...and assuming the army would find it hard to resist their demands), (2) being in power makes the military structure weak.

There is very little evidence for the first. As far as I can see, despite Benazir, Zia`s position was unassailable till his death. There is also little real pressure on Musharraf to go. Civil society can`t even get the latter to institute an inquiry into Kargil, let alone force him to step down. Any danger that Musharraf perceives comes from either his own army, or from the jihadis, not from civil society.

The second is also debatable. With open warfare being largely ruled out in the sub-continent, military rule may actually be helpful in keeping the army ranks happy and gainfully employed, rather than being bored and frustrated as they otherwise would be. An idle mind, its said, is the devil`s workshop. The added importance and power that even ordinary army men perceive they have in the current dispensation may actually help bolster their loyalty to the institution and to their chief, from whom all largesse flows. Senior officers who were unlikely to attain the highest rank of chief would also be happy, since they are assured good post-retirement rehabilitation and other benefits. Debates about the army becoming corrupt and losing discipline are somewhat stretched I think because they assume that the (i)army would not otherwise be corrupt, (ii) that this corruption is unacceptable to the top brass, and (iii) that corruption equals losing discipline. All of these are doubtful propositions. In fact, the only real threat to army discipline comes from the very small group of people who could become army chief in the absense of Musharraf. But even here the question is of who will lead, and not about whether army rule is good or not for the army itself. Discipline can again be established after the new chief is chosen, the basic imperative for army rule remains.

I therefore think that your conclusion that it is only mindsets which need to be changed is too optimistic. If Pakistan wants an end to military rule, certain basic conditions need to be changed.

narain

Kuch nahi ho sakta hai!

The most popular political leader of Pakistan`s history, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, was a minister in the military establishment of Ayub Khan. So was Nawaz Sharif and many others.

It is no hidden secret that in times of turmoil our political leaders have always looked towards the military to step and solve situations of conflict.

Our political culture has not grown in stature and how can we suddenly delete the role of the military and play our destinies into the hands of certain incompetent politicians.

And with regrets, I see no politicians who can take Pakistan out of this quagmire and convince the military to go back to the barracks.

Given the new geo-political realities of the world I don`t think it is anyway possible anymore to send military back to the barracks. The monster has been unleashed with all its might and fury upon the people. Only a foreign invasion which results in accute humiliation of military and its disbandment can free us. Another possibility is that this criminal organization breaks down from its internal pressure. I have a shred of hope, still in me, that there might be some people in this organization who might have a good conscience and who value freedom. A popular revolt will only strengthen the source of this evil which is in Washington to make the life of human beings miserable further. I think the oppression is complete and total now. There is no hope.

``Pakistan`s military-intelligence combine has no desire to allow a normal political process to evolve in the country and will continue to intervene on one pretext or another. The situation might change temporarily in the event of broad international rejection abroad or widespread civilian disenchantment at home. But unless the military arrives at the institutional realization that its intervention has been the reason for destabilizing Pakistan, and allows political institutions to evolve without micro-management, the country will not develop a permanent political system. ``
- Hussain Haqqani in the current issue of Satribune


The above makes lots of sense.

To answer Mr. Khan`s question, we need to study the fate of 3 military rulers who preceded Musharraf.

Of these three military rulers, only one (i.e. Ayub Khan) resigned office due to intense political pressure and agitation. The other two were forced out of office by abnormal and cataclysmic circumstances.

Yahya left office only after Pakistan Army was defeated in war in East Pakistan.
Zia-ul-Haq had to be assassinated.

It will take a violent and/or cataclysmic event to force Musharraf out of power. Given Pakistan`s nuclear arsenal, it is unlikely that the country will face war in the forseeable future. This only leaves the other option i.e. assassination. This is how Musharraf will go.

Already 3 attempts have been made against him. The Wana operation has created more enemies for Musharraf. So far, only Jihadis are vying for his blood. But if Musharraf refuses to shed the uniform in Dec 2004, some moderates may also join hands with Jihadis to remove Musharraf. Lets not forget that a few army officers were also involved in the last attempt to assassinate him.

I forsee a fatal attack on Musharraf in the next 16 weeks!

#1

you make it sound as if it is ONLY the punjabi politicians who are to blame for this. granted the punjabi politicians have been incredibly self-serving, but are politicians from the rest of pakistan so damn clean and blameless? :) i think not.

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

I agree with Nazar saheb about the spinelessness of Punjabi politicians.

Many such politicians are turncoats who need the Army more than the Army needs them. Were Nawaz and Benazir to return to Pakistan, these insecure politicians will dump Musharraf and beg forgiveness of Benazir & Nawaz.

Another group of Punjabi politicians have criminal and corruption cases against them. This group cannot afford to sit on opposition benches (or worse, not get elected at all). Joining the government is the only way these people can get Police, FIA, NAB and the judiciary off their backs. The Chaudhrys of Punjab and Faisal Saleh Hayat belong to this group.

Yet another group of politicians supports the Army out of sheer ambition. These leaders are senior and experienced, but their political careers were deliberately stunted by Benazir and Nawaz. Aftab Sherpao, Sheikh Rasheed and Farooq Leghari belong to this group.

Do not blame the institution of military. The military is merely an arm of the society. Deeper issue is the false premise on which Pakistan was proposed, designed and formed. You have to correct the fundamental problem first. That problem, among other things, is the systematically unjust approach to life. Naturally, it can not be superficially corrected. There is need for first recognizing the essential mistake of 1947. Musharraf is trying to make preliminary advances in that direction. Of necessity he has to do it without appearing to be a sellout. That is where his statemsmanship will be tested.

Nazar Sahib,
Why do you guys keep on blaming Pubjabiz? Those Pathans and Sindhis weren`t born in Makha either.

Punjabi is basically a gandu quom - both people and politicians. They have supported each and every dictator in the history of Paksitan. I am ashamed of being a Punjabi. It is moment like these when I wish that I were a Hindu from Karnatka or worst a sikh.

Feroz

Brilliant article... one with effective solutions and a course for us to follow... agree with it... the recognition of army as a player is sadly essential given the present political reality. For a civilian government to continue it will have to respect the power equation in the short term... maybe in the future we will be able to develop some semblance of a legal civilian government albeit with a strong presidency.

The onus of nation-building then falls, sadly and unfortunately, on Khaki-wardi-wallahs... but there is hope... the horrible defeat and humiliation at Kargill has put some sense into them... the old 80s pipe dream of an Islamist federation extending up to the borders of Modern Russia is no more... ISI has been recruiting moderates and secular officers off late, and major restructuring is happening within the army. The army has for all practical purposes stopped imagining itself as glorious Mujahidin pitted against the world... but has now begun to understand its role within the parameters of a standing army of a legal nationstate... this will be a welcome sign ... both for Pakistan and the region around us.


Now hide because gujju is going to ask you your salary... you being in the same profession as me.

Hi Feroze,
It is futile to expect that mere arguments will force the Army back into its barracks. The fact is that for a country of Pakistan`s size, the Army is too big and too powerful and there are absolutely no checks and balances. The army has tasted absolute power and it has the means to control Pakistan forever. India is too big and too diverse for a mililtary dictator to manage, but Pakistan is just the right size. On top of it, Mushy has cleverly rebranded the Army as a stabilizing influence that can keep the mullahs at bay and make peace with India. Naturally there is external support to keep things the way they are. Internally, Mushy has also cleverly maintained relations with the mullahs and feudals so that they don`t have a strong objection to military rule. Bottom line, the army is firmly in control and has no incentive to back down.

The only possibility is if by some means, the Pak army is divided into 2 or 3 independent armies that protect certain geographical areas. The command at the center could be a loose alignment of the 2 or 3 army chiefs along with the other services and the political leadership. This way, you would have some checks and balances if one army chief becomes too ambitious. This is quite different from other countries, but then, Pakistan is quite different from other countries. Also you have nukes, so you can afford to monkey around with the army structure.