Dereliction of Duty

Re #7 Fuzair

What Abraham Lincoln did has not repeated in the US since and probably never happened before. Correct me if I am wrong.

What Mr. Musharraf did to grab power has happened before in Pakistan and can happen again.

Why does not Mr. Musharraf get down and fight elections if he is best amongst the
choices that Pakistani people have?

fuzair # 7

`` The implicit assumption here is that the people of Pakistan somehow abdicated their civic responsibilities. I`d beg to differ. Just as I wouldn`t expect an infant to know the difference between right or wrong, neither would I expect the great unwashed to be aware of their civic responsibilities in making sure that we watch the guardians. ``

I will disagree with fuzair. The proliferation of internet and satellite television has exposed majority of the people in the sub-continent to the rights and wrongs of the world. People are resistant to change. They are afraid of the unknown.

Been lurking on this board for many years now, so I have a sense of what might happen. When someone writes a piece that is not favourable to his or her country, there will be a few replies discussing the actual article, before someone or the other on the other side of the border finds out that he/she cannot resist gloating. and gloat (s)he will.

So, for example, if there`s an article on, say, the prevalence of a particular easily preventable disease, or the corruption in the higher echelons of a country`s military, or *heaven forbid* the status of women / sexual minorities in a country, then for a few interacts, peace will reign and people will actually interact.

Then some juvenile will butt in and gloat about how ``it`s so much better over here... you poor sods. We`re so much better than you when it comes to XYZ``

And, smarting from the original article, cloaked in a inarticulate sense of wounded pride, someone from the original country will respond! ``Ha! have you seen the newspaper articles (insert long and lengthy paste) about such and such place in your country? At least we don`t have (insert hate speech about country/religion / taste in clothes)``. At this point the discussion will swiftly degenerate into the ``penis god of the Hindus``, ``Prophet Mohammad and Ayesha`` or some such crap.

And the tamasha will continue.

There`s enough crap in the interacts on chowk. If you respond to the people trying to provoke dissension, you`re playing into their hands. Keep chucking crap, and soon, crapchuckers will be all that is left.

So, friends, before you post. Think.
Cheers.

Been lurking on this board for many years now, so I have a sense of what might happen. When someone writes a piece that is not favourable to his or her country, there will be a few replies discussing the actual article, before someone or the other on the other side of the border finds out that he/she cannot resist gloating. and gloat (s)he will.

So, for example, if there`s an article on, say, the prevalence of a particular easily preventable disease, or the corruption in the higher echelons of a country`s military, or *heaven forbid* the status of women / sexual minorities in a country, then for a few interacts, peace will reign and people will actually interact.

Then some juvenile will butt in and gloat about how ``it`s so much better over here... you poor sods. We`re so much better than you when it comes to XYZ``

And, smarting from the original article, cloaked in a inarticulate sense of wounded pride, someone from the original country will respond! ``Ha! have you seen the newspaper articles (insert long and lengthy paste) about such and such place in your country? At least we don`t have (insert hate speech about country/religion / taste in clothes)``. At this point the discussion will swiftly degenerate into the ``penis god of the Hindus``, ``Prophet Mohammad and Ayesha`` or some such crap.

And the tamasha will continue.

There`s enough crap in the interacts on chowk. If you respond to the people trying to provoke dissension, you`re playing into their hands. Keep chucking crap, and soon, crapchuckers will be all that is left.

So, friends, before you post. Think.
Cheers.

While the passions may be heartfelt, and in principle I agree that the military should be subordinate to the civilian authorities, this author needs to get a grip on reality. Its not enough to say that Musharraf is a traitor, broke his word, etc. So what? Is there an alternative to him?

I hate to sound like Romair but if the choice is BB, NS or Musharraf, I`ll vote for Musharraf twice! Heck, I don`t particularly care that he didn`t come in with a ``heaavy mundut.`` Remember, Abraham Lincoln ruled large parts of the US through martial law, shut down the press, arrested and imprisoned people without trials, and had orders drawn up for the arrest of the Chief Justice of the US. Sometimes you have to break a few eggs and drive a tank over the Constitution.

And the truly sad thing is that even with all his faults, and he has been a pretty big disappointment in some ways, he is still better than all the rulers we`ve had since Yahya Khan.

So, Ms. Yasmeen, how exactly do you reconcile NS`s behavior with his democratic ideals and ``heaavy mundut?`` OR are you reserving your bricks only for Musharraf? Don`t forget, NS also took an oath.

If you are a BB fan, we can also come up with some questions for her?


Feroz:
The implicit assumption here is that the people of Pakistan somehow abdicated their civic responsibilities. I`d beg to differ. Just as I wouldn`t expect an infant to know the difference between right or wrong, neither would I expect the great unwashed to be aware of their civic responsibilities in making sure that we watch the guardians.

Now, if you argue that the so-called elite of Pakistan are to blame, that is another matter.

I met VADM Ahsan once or twice before his death (he was an RIN pal of my mamoo`s) and he certainly was a gentleman of the old school. But then, he was a naval officer and not a ground pounder!

Temporal:
Lt. Gen. Yaqub; he was demoted to Maj. Gen. (restored by Bhutto) as punishment for abandoning his post.

ferozk:

i believe there was another fellow who also quit his commission -- think it may be maj gen yaqub

t

ferozk: good writeup.

Re: # 3

I believe she is referring to the current brass of generals not the ones in the past.

I am a little confused by this article...what is Ms Yasmins complaint about?

Is she upset that no General has ever gone against the COAS?

If so that`s not true...consider Yahya Khan was overthrown by outraged junior officers..senior officers refused ZAB`s commands to fire on civilians during the PNA agitation..several Admirals and Air Marshals have lost their jobs because they were outspoken..lets not forget the whole general Ziauddin episode in 1999 when Nawaz was trying to impose his own person onto the Army some generals did back him against Mushy..

As far as the broader complaint of principles..the Army has gone through several phases..Ayub Khan and his coup which took advantage of the instability in the area..Yahya again which took advantage of instability..and Zia again who took advantage of instability..while Mushy acted out of self interest..he was not interested in saving the country as much as his group would not support a repeat of what happened to Karamat..

Ms Yasmeen..BRAVO....

I commend for writing this courageous and poignant piece..I especially liked the line:

``Mr Musharraf, with due respect, for what do we squander the lion’s share of our national resources, if we have to sing the praises even for assistance in rescue operations? Please, tell me yourself, what are you paid for?`

In any job with monetary renumeration, it is of paramount moral importance to realize who pays the bills....Literally, who puts the food on the table?...My company`s paycheck had the following printed on the envelope: ``Our customers make this paycheck possible``.

If this were any public corporation, with an ethical Board of Directors, Mr. Musharaf and his coterie of commanders would be put out to pasture with no hope of employment in a public corporatation ever....

With the exponentially higher moral, ethical, human (and religious) responsibility of public service and leadership, it should never be forgotten who pays the bills for the President, the Chief of Army Staff, the Commander X Corps, the Chief Justice, the Foreign Secretary, and the police SHO, etc...Since it is useless highlighting their constitutional obligations, one should never forget that it is their moral DUTY to serve the people who feed their children. My grandfather ( may God rest his soul), a wise man, used to say ``namak ha*ami sub se bara gunah hai``.....

Ms. Yasmeen, once again, thank you for raising your voice of humanity.....

re: Nighat Yasmeen

``Shamelessly, we don’t have one general, I repeat one general who has ever had guts to stand up and said NO …I am not going to dishonour my solemn pledge to defend the Constitution``

The foremost name, which springs to mind is not of a general but of an admiral. Admiral Ahsan, who was the governor of East Pakistan and resigned his post because he did not approve of the West Pakistani handling of the situation in East Pakistan.

I was fortunate to know the gentleman, as he was a very good friend of my late father and he was one of the few military men, that I know, who never profited from his position. It is hard to believe in our age of cynicism and disappointments, but there were men and women of character and of conscience in Pakistan. It is indeed our misfortune, that the present generation does not know about them and this ignorance does not lessen their sacrifice as much as it highlights our own ignorance about our own past.

There are many who are alive even today and sitting in the evening of their lives, they silently watch the evening shadows lenghten on their life`s work.

I can sit and wring my hands and cry, but I am well aware that the failure of Pakistan is the collective failure of its best and brightest. It is my failure, because I did not do enough and instead, I chose inaction over responsibility. The ruin of Pakistan and its blame rests squarely on our shoulders, because as the citizens of Pakistan we did not do our duty and because instead of standing up for our rights, we appeased expediency of interests.

The ranks of the army in Pakistan come from within the people of Pakistan and that suggests that the army is able to distort the political process, because we the people allow it to trample the constitution. Politics, like nature abhors a vacuum, and when the people of Pakistan abdicate their civic responsibilities, then the vacuum created by our apathy will be filled and it could be the dictatorship of the uniform or the the dictatorship of the parliament.

Those who give up the right to be free, have no right to complain about the loss of their freedoms. We should remember the words of Benjamim Franklin, when he said that ``those who give their freedoms in return for a little security end up getting none``. The real question is to ask ourselves, that why despite all the years of the whip and lash, we are still willing to suffer under the whip and lash and spurred boot of an oppressor?

The answer lies deep within our conscience and we do not admit it, because like the picture of Dorian Gray, our reality is too ugly and evil to behold. The evil, which we all do and adhere to is best summed up in our own reasonings, which mimick the Shakespearean words of Richard III. When prompted if he would do evil, Richard replies that yes he would, if the evil is for a good cause. We are evil, because we have rationalized that our evil actions are actually good intentions and as such, are not to be blamed.

Ciao