• Tuesday, October 15, 2019

General Kayani and Nawaz Sharif

Discussion in 'Pakistani Siasat' started by ajtr, Dec 11, 2010.

  1. ajtr

    ajtr BANNED

    Messages:
    9,357
    Joined:
    May 25, 2010
    Ratings:
    +0 / 7,677 / -0
    Subscription article in The friday times ....so no link....
    General Kayani and Nawaz Sharif

    Khaled Ahmed

    WikiLeaks confirm what the domestic commentators have been saying all along: the army calls the shots, hates India, wants a stranglehold on Afghanistan, and hates Nawaz Sharif and Zardari in varying and fluctuating degrees. The ISI is an internally fractured organisation following different policies at the same time and letting retired officers like former ISI boss Hamid Gul run the outfit through personal loyalties. Pakistan plays a double game in answer to America’s double game in what is called a ‘transactional’ relationship complicated by Pakistan’s misperception that America needs it more than it needs America.

    When Hamid Gul’s shenanigans were revealed by WikiLeaks in July 2010, he said it was all a plot by the US to malign him. He was joined in this later by ex-army chief Aslam Beg who wants to build the scenario that America is Pakistan’s enemy number one, thus confirming the general military view in Pakistan that Pakistan must fight two powers at once, global America and regional India, while Pakistan’s economy is belly-up feeding the sprawling military establishment. The most interesting commentary offered by WikiLeaks, however, is about the triangular relationship among the army chief, Nawaz Sharif and Zardari. What is revealed is a complex picture in which the three protagonists are confused about one another, which is worse than if the lines were clearly drawn.

    From ‘troika’ to ‘triangle’: And this springs from General Kayani’s decision – so far – not to oust the incumbent government one way or another. The leaks also tell us that he has often vacillated in this determination. He doesn’t like Zardari and there is evidence that he has his ear close to what the media is saying and wants to remain popular as an army chief who does not ‘interfere’. He also does not like Nawaz Sharif and that has happened because of the past experience with the Punjabi leader who can be more powerful than Pakistan’s dominant army can stomach. Yet he cannot remain aloof from the view taken by the rest of the top brass that Nawaz Sharif is close to how the army thinks about terrorism and America.

    There was a time when Pakistan – wrongly – thought that a triangle of power in Islamabad called ‘troika’ ensured stability. The president under Article 58/2/B plus the army chief on one side and the prime minister on the other was the three-way extra-constitutional distribution of power that was supposed to preclude the imposition of martial law in the 1990s. What happened was a sad series of topplings in which the president repeatedly ganged up with the army chief. The decade turned out to be the most disastrous in the country’s history, a truth that was realised by the two repentant mainstream parties when they wrote up the Charter of Democracy in 2006.

    ‘Principled’ Nawaz Sharif and ‘tight-lipped’ Kayani: The pavlovian reflex however is at work again. What has the army experienced at the hands of the two parties? The GHQ has always thought that the PPP was too liberal therefore not sincere to the country’s ideology and not outspokenly against India. It had also to live down the memory of its founder Zulfikar Ali Bhutto humiliating an already defeated army in 1971 when he arrested its top brass. On the other hand, the GHQ, formerly affectionate towards General Zia’s protégé politician Nawaz Sharif, had to bear the shock of the rightwing leader’s firing of two army chiefs, Jahangir Karamat and Pervez Musharraf, one after the other.

    Nawaz Sharif has been called ‘unreliable’ by WikiLeaks and PMLN spokesman Ahsan Iqbal rightly says he is seen as unreliable because he is ‘principled’. (In a weak state, lack of flexibility is indeed dangerous, which makes Maulana Fazlur Rehman a much better politician than Imran Khan and Qazi Hussain Ahmad.) But Nawaz Sharif is playing his cards very carefully this time. He knows the army likes him for saying that the war against terrorism is not Pakistan’s war and wants General Kayani to know that he is hardly dangerous this time around. WikiLeaks have him praising Kayani after the phone-call he made during his Long March to restore Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry. He has got his brother Shahbaz Sharif to call on the army chief on a regular basis. The old game of ‘toppling’ is being played but with more sophistication than during the crude 1990s.

    Mind games amid clouds of ambivalence: Ambivalence reigns supreme. General Kayani has Zardari playing ball on the question of normalisation with India and America’s ‘do more’ policy. Why should he get rid of a government that at times goes beyond what he wants it to do? WikiLeaks force one to believe that he is playing a complex mind game with the two political rivals, using the popular power of one against the parliamentary power of the other. But the two politicians are also playing mind games of their own. Zardari is sinuously complex, even liable to over-reach himself in his tactical suppleness. But Nawaz Sharif is no less creatively complicated as revealed by his Charter of Pakistan which contains all sorts of things in it, including a stiff dose of the ‘toppling’ medicine of the 1990s to keep General Kayani’s interest alive.

    But Nawaz Sharif is convinced that Pakistan cannot survive without normalisation with India. One can safely reveal that one of the messages taken by Shahbaz Sharif to General Kayani was about how much Pakistan will gain from of a normal trade relationship with India. The message was drafted by one of Pakistan’s leading economists and passed to Nawaz Sharif by one of the leading industrialists in Lahore.

    Nawaz Sharif’s message to General Kayani:
    It made the following points: Free trade with India will lower bilateral tension; it will obviate Pakistan’s matching of defence expenditure while the latter is growing at the rate of 8 percent of the GDP; it will boost Pakistan’s GDP and enable it to achieve higher security; Pakistan will be able to avoid seasonal price hikes of goods; Pakistani farmers will benefit from technical knowhow, leading to rise in rural incomes; legalised trade with India will increase revenues; tariff barriers by India will be removed by Pakistan joining many other external traders; and Lahore will emerge as the centre of commerce and finance serving many cities across the border.

    Will the general pay heed to this part of Nawaz Sharif’s Charter of Pakistan? Or will he be forced to embrace an increasingly unpopular Zardari even more firmly? He is a tight-lipped man, which is good for the mind games he is playing at home, but not so good when it comes to moulding the thinking of the army to changing regional and global conditions.


    Welcome to The Friday Times
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 3
  2. Parthvi

    Parthvi BANNED

    New Recruit

    Messages:
    13
    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2010
    Ratings:
    +0 / 7 / -0
    It's a tragedy that to this very day a General is calling the shots in Pakistan. I would say what Kamran Shafi from Pakistan has always said. Zardari and Nawaz should get together and face their common foe "The Army".
     
  3. blain2

    blain2 ADVISORS

    Messages:
    6,897
    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2006
    Ratings:
    +34 / 8,335 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    There is no rallying behind donkeys...thus Army remains a more credible entity for Pakistanis than any politician.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 11
  4. ajpirzada

    ajpirzada PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Messages:
    6,011
    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Ratings:
    +11 / 4,538 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    army remains credible as its generals were not replaced by politicians while democracy in Pakistan is incredible as its politicians were always derailed by the generals.

    otherwise army is also corrupt but it fortunately knows how to hide it better
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 5
  5. Malik Usman

    Malik Usman FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    1,907
    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2007
    Ratings:
    +0 / 1,081 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Kuwait
    Whenever military ruled in Pakistan.....it gave benefits to general public and those fudels, landlords and politicans were put aside in a cornor....and whenever these so called political parties came in power they powered themselves and their families by looting this country and making properties in Dubai and UK and filled their Swiss Bank accounts.....Just see the current example.........The highest level of curroption in Pakistan's history. They even not forgive the Hajjis. They forget that they will have to face ....day of judgment.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 3
  6. Tameem

    Tameem SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    4,000
    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Ratings:
    +3 / 3,499 / -13
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    The Future Integrity of Pakistan is directly related to democratic institutions i.e., Parliment, Judiciary, Free midia and Awam in whatever form it currently are, It surely doesn't relates to Army rule which will be poisonous in the long run.

    IMHO we have to take the long route to nurture our political leadership gradually from the interference of establishment hands which first divides and than rule.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  7. Tameem

    Tameem SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    4,000
    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Ratings:
    +3 / 3,499 / -13
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    Did you Know why Army is more Credible than Any Politicians??????.

    BCZ My Dear....It is not answerable/accountable to anyone let alone Awam. On the Other hands Politician are answerable to everyone

    Opposition
    Allies
    Parliament
    Judiciary
    Free Media
    Neighbours
    And above all
    AWAM

    Open your Eyes and smell the Cofee!!!
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 3
  8. Meengla

    Meengla SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    3,819
    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2009
    Ratings:
    +9 / 5,057 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United States
    Correct.
    People need to realize that EVERY army ruler had to leave after becoming highly unpopular despite, in three cases, the longest absolute rules in Pakistan. Why is that so? That is because the so-called benefits of the army rule were simply too little.
    Fact is that a leader like Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto was very likely to win in the 1976 elections despite inheriting an almost bankrupt country in 1971. How did Ayub leave in 1969? Or Yahya in 1971? Or Zia in 1988? or Musharraf in 2008? All of them may have done some 'good' but were very likely to face humiliating defeat in free and fair elections if they had allowed by the end of their respective terms.
     
  9. somebozo

    somebozo ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    18,843
    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2010
    Ratings:
    +9 / 18,595 / -13
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia
    Because army is the only creditable institute left which understands our strategic position and can take decisions in favour of it. However every should help to build a peoples government rather than army cheif annexing the chair of president each time for himself.
     
  10. Solomon2

    Solomon2 BANNED

    Messages:
    19,426
    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2008
    Ratings:
    +14 / 9,886 / -51
    Country:
    United States
    Location:
    United States
    There is no "otherwise" about it. The Army is unaccountable. You can't know what wrongdoings go on that you can't see; on the flip side, one can't trust the Army much, and for the same reason. Only personal relationships remain as restraints.

    My guess is that this situation can be alleviated by making the Inspectors General of Pakistan's armed forces political appointments, rather than career military ones. Limited-term IGs could be proposed by the president and confirmed by the legislature; an IG can go everywhere and see everything, and soldiers given illegal or questionable tasks by their superiors can appeal to it and be protected via due process. The IGs report to a legislative committee and can only be prematurely removed by the legislature, not the army command, president, or prime minister.

    I imagine such IGs will be strongly resented by the army brass yet under their watch corruption and abuse of power will melt away like ice cream in the sun; after a while, all that remains is to mop up a few sticky patches on the ground.
     
  11. F-16_Falcon

    F-16_Falcon FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    581
    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2010
    Ratings:
    +0 / 189 / -0
    army understood that zardari is much better person than ganja. kayani will continue support for president zardari.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  12. H2O3C4Nitrogen

    H2O3C4Nitrogen SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    4,386
    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2007
    Ratings:
    +0 / 1,706 / -0
    Though i agree with you to some extent but just like the CIA is unaccountable for its certain Black Ops and there secret sources of funding so is PA in Pakistan.There are alot of laws in US made just to facilitate the unaccountability of certain organizations which rule USA.There has to be a certain entity in almost every country which should enjoy that level of privileges as long as its doing the work for the state and PA fits well in Pakistan...!
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  13. Solomon2

    Solomon2 BANNED

    Messages:
    19,426
    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2008
    Ratings:
    +14 / 9,886 / -51
    Country:
    United States
    Location:
    United States
    A very poor analogy. The CIA's focus has always been external threats, and as far as I know (I haven't checked the laws in a while) since the reforms of the late 1970s a complete chain of accountability has existed. Structural reforms of the 1980s included an IG subject to Congressional confirmation and review, thus giving the IG increased leverage over recalcitrant officers. In Floyd Paseman's memoir he cites this reform as key at improving not just legal compliance but also at eliminating ineptitude within the "old boys" network. Nobody in America worries about the CIA director riding the agency to the Presidency like Mushy did with the Army and ISI.

    You see, it shouldn't just be up to an individual officer, or a clique of them, to determine exactly what activities are "doing the work for the state". People have to be subject to a chain of command that includes elected officials and being subject to the rule of law. That is what is missing in the PA and ISI.
     
  14. kursed

    kursed FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    249
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2007
    Ratings:
    +1 / 288 / -0
    If anyone thinks that 'Army' is 'really' all that credible in Pakistan, just try getting Gen. (r) Musharraf back to Pakistan. Can't wait for him to come back.

    Army, Air Force and the Navy for that matter face corruption just as regularly as any other institution in Pakistan. It's just taking them some time to come to realize the fact that their claim at the status of 'holy-cow', is not being seriously taken by this generation. Hopefully things will be a lot better 10/15 years down the lane, when the present generation will take the reigns of control of the country.
     
  15. Awesome

    Awesome RETIRED

    Messages:
    22,023
    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Ratings:
    +5 / 20,608 / -0
    Correction, Wikileaks does not confirm anything, except what the Americans "feel" is the situation on ground.

    Once again this is not confirmed as Hamid Gul and Aslam Beg are more or less outcasts and are renowned for their extremist views. Their views, and the views formed by Americans upon their views, is no confirmation about what how Pakistan views the situation.