What's new

If you can’t beat them, obey them. Pakistan’s generals are ever more involved in running the country: Economist

Status
Not open for further replies.

Constantin84

FULL MEMBER
Feb 4, 2020
600
0
592
Country
Romania
Location
United Kingdom
illegal invasion of Iraq ?? Ask the people of Iraq

If you want a Pinochet in Pakistan go ahead and make my day. Of course you know deep down in your heart things in Pakistan won't change
Pinochet was actually great for the economy. He, ofcourse broke a few commie eggs to make an omelette but that's ok in my book,you know what they say about a good communist.
 

nahtanbob

BANNED
Sep 24, 2018
7,822
-37
2,583
Country
United States
Location
United States
Pinochet was actually great for the economy. He, ofcourse broke a few commie eggs to make an omelette but that's ok in my book.
Pinochet had his head straight on a few things. it helps there were a lot of sane people in Chile
In Pakistan it is a different story even if I put a Pinochet at the top.

In retrospect Musharraf was the closest thing to Pinochet. Of course he floundered his way around.
 

Sal12

FULL MEMBER
Aug 3, 2013
581
0
990
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Kingdom
Make no mistake. Pak military is the guardian of this corrupt rotten system which suits all entities i.e. politicians, bureaucracy, police, judiciary, media, and beloved military.

Sometimes these mafias fight each other when their interest clashes but most of the time these mafia help each other in their needy times. But there is no one except God to help the common man from the clutches of these mafia.
 

GumNaam

ELITE MEMBER
Sep 23, 2016
9,825
-2
12,691
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
If you can’t beat them, obey them. Pakistan’s generals are ever more involved in running the country
The Economist • 3h

And the prime minister seems ever more dependent on their backing
BEFORE HE BECAME prime minister, Imran Khan was happy to hold forth about the role of the armed forces in Pakistan. They were so influential in politics, he told The Economist, only because civilian governments had been so ineffectual. Once in office, he said, he would change all that. Yet in early March, when his government lost an important Senate election, he did what he has done many times as prime minister, and rushed off to seek the advice of the high command, to the derision of his political adversaries.
For most of the period since independence in 1947, Pakistan’s army has either run the country directly, under military dictators, or pulled strings behind the scenes. Civilian politicians, in turn, have either rubbed along with the army or been ousted by it. No surprise, then, that far from Mr Khan putting the army in its place, opposition politicians contend that it was the army that awarded Mr Khan his current position. In return, they argue, Mr Khan has run a government of unparalleled subservience to the generals.
It is true that khaki tentacles seem to be reaching ever further into the business of government. For a long time retired generals have marched into ambassadorships and other sinecures. Jobs such as running the national disaster-management authority might come naturally to ex-soldiers, who are widely considered competent administrators. But current and former military men have gradually taken on more and more jobs that are central to the health of the economy. They run the civil aviation authority, the national institute of health, various state-owned firms including the national airline, and the government agencies in charge of power, water, telecoms and housing. To crown the army’s hold on the economy, a retired general, Asim Bajwa, heads the agency that supervises the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, helping funnel some $60bn of Chinese investment into infrastructure.
The main difference between Mr Khan’s relationship with the army and that of his predecessors, says Farzana Shaikh of Chatham House, a think-tank, is how harmonious it seems. “What is different about this particular government is the dropping of all pretence that it conducts policy independently of the military,” she says. Whereas previous governments sparred with the top brass, Mr Khan seems happy to do as he is told.
Mr Khan’s longest-serving predecessor, Nawaz Sharif, rose to prominence as a protégé of the military dictator of the day, Zia ul-Haq. But the army toppled him in a coup in 1999. After he came to power again in 2013, he bickered with the generals about their failure to clamp down on Islamic terrorism. At times during his premiership, the army was openly insubordinate, refusing to help disperse protesters who were paralysing the capital, Islamabad, for example. A television network that enthusiastically backed Mr Sharif mysteriously disappeared from the airwaves. Pakistanis widely assume that the army was behind Mr Sharif’s ban from politics at the hands of a special anti-corruption court in 2018. Since his ouster, he has railed publicly about the army’s interference in politics.
Mr Khan, in contrast, does not seem to be jostling with the generals. Instead, his relentless legal harassment of his political opponents has left him with only narrow political support and therefore especially reliant on the army, Ms Shaikh argues. Qamar Javed Bajwa, the chief of army staff, assures diplomats he has no desire to run the country. He makes a show of calling Mr Khan his “boss”. And he does seem ready to help drum up votes from pliable politicians when Mr Khan’s powers of persuasion fail him.
No one imagines, however, that the relationship is really a two-way street. If the army comes to view Mr Khan as a liability, it is unlikely to have much compunction about dropping him, just as it did Mr Sharif. At that point Mr Khan may remember the view he expressed in opposition, that the generals “just don’t have the vision to run the country”.
[/URL]

If this truly is how international community view Pakistan, then country has a real image problem abroad. It's time to market the country in a positive light, and stop army hating desi liberals from defaming the country.

@Jungibaaz @MastanKhan @AgNoStiC MuSliM @Patriot forever @AZ1 @ghazi52 @Jazzbot @ziaulislam @krash @koolio @Indus Pakistan @SQ8
welcome to the 21st century. the economy is front & center in determining a strong defense. the american military industrial complex has been involved in the u.s. economy since the 1950s as is the Chinese military so its about damn time out GHQ get involved in it. if someone thinks the economy does not effect the national defense is living in a fool's paradise.
 

nahtanbob

BANNED
Sep 24, 2018
7,822
-37
2,583
Country
United States
Location
United States
welcome to the 21st century. the economy is front & center in determining a strong defense. the american military industrial complex has been involved in the u.s. economy since the 1950s as is the Chinese military so its about damn time out GHQ get involved in it. if someone thinks the economy does not effect the national defense is living in a fool's paradise.
if you want to go that route It is time GHQ is involved in economic development
 

GumNaam

ELITE MEMBER
Sep 23, 2016
9,825
-2
12,691
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
if you want to go that route It is time GHQ is involved in economic development
ok nathu raam, I will tell the GHQ Generals that nathu raam is having premenstrual cramps worrying about our economy and recommends that the GHQ be involved in economic development, happy nathu raam?
 
Last edited:

VCheng

ELITE MEMBER
Sep 29, 2010
39,522
55
33,944
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
This is the impression and people see IK simply as the zoom filter for the Pakistani military.
The interesting thing is that there is simply no evidence that the military is doing any of the things mentioned in the story. And the yet the obviously erroneous impression as you mention persists.
 

akramishaqkhan

FULL MEMBER

New Recruit

Feb 28, 2017
66
0
98
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Do people know that there are currently 76 US Military veterans serving the in Congress. I am not even going to start to tabulate how many ex-servicemen are in boards, executive levels, not to mention dominate one of the largest industries in the US (defense), which is a constant revolving door of ex.mil men. The Defense expenditure in the US is the second largest expenditure after social security. Infact many people argue that by the time you add the supplementals and hidden amounts Defense and Intelligence is the single largest expenditure.

I'll tell one other goldie, in the US if you are serving serviceman, you get to bypass airport lines and board ahead of other people, you get special discounts on everything imaginable from food items to insurance to housing loans etc. There are entire industries supporting this demographic. So before other people get you all bothered about your own institution and armed forces, take a deep breath and smell the coffee they are not serving. Try watching any sporting event and you see an orgy of military parades and planes flying over - (paid for my corporate america). So yes, we should always look to identify the best people for the job regardless of their background, but lets not get triggered so easily folks.

Here is another one, of the 46 Presidents the US has had, 31 have served in the military!!! So for God's sake don't let people trip you over on this issue, when they themselves do exactly what they are trying to get you all hyped up about, through these stupid articles etc.
 
Last edited:

SQ8

ADVISORS
Mar 28, 2009
34,195
356
70,108
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
The interesting thing is that there is simply no evidence that the military is doing any of the things mentioned in the story. And the yet the obviously erroneous impression as you mention persists.
Its repetition of the narrative that makes it credible without evidence. Say WMDs 10000 times and they become true.
 

VCheng

ELITE MEMBER
Sep 29, 2010
39,522
55
33,944
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Its repetition of the narrative that makes it credible without evidence. Say WMDs 10000 times and they become true.
Yes, but then again, the real facts shine through any manufactured narrative sooner or later, bet it WMDs or be it the Pakistani military.
 

VCheng

ELITE MEMBER
Sep 29, 2010
39,522
55
33,944
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Well, the larger the lie the more difficult it gets to hide over time. Be it 50 years or 150 - truth does prevail.
Given your comment above and the context of this thread, can we expect the reality of the roles of the Pak military to eventually prevail over the narratives such as those in the OP? After all, truth will prevail.
 

SQ8

ADVISORS
Mar 28, 2009
34,195
356
70,108
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Given your comment above and the context of this thread, can we expect the reality of the roles of the Pak military to eventually prevail over the narratives such as those in the OP? After all, truth will prevail.
It all depends on the context and audience - take the moon landing conspiracy that it was all staged - assuming that it was; count the number of NASA engineers, astronauts, external contractors, government officials and all witnesses and even janitorial staff that would need to be in on that conspiracy to keep it “staged” - even if some were unwittingly part of such a conspiracy- 20% would still be able to put 2&2 together eventually and 10% would speak up.

The same way, lets apply that to Pakistani military officers top to bottom, bureaucracy, politicians, foreign workers and others would all have to testify to seeing this amount of control.

My own opinion is that it seems collective because of aligning self interests of those at the top which give the impression that it is a cabal. Heck if anything, had this been some long term establishment with “goals” then they wouldn’t be screwing up with misaligned paths for the past 70 years.
 

VCheng

ELITE MEMBER
Sep 29, 2010
39,522
55
33,944
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
My own opinion is that it seems collective because of aligning self interests of those at the top which give the impression that it is a cabal. Heck if anything, had this been some long term establishment with “goals” then they wouldn’t be screwing up with misaligned paths for the past 70 years.
So is this cabal a reality or mere perception? If one argues that the results matter the most, the present day situation can be taken to mean that Pakistan exists for benefiting this cabal and definitely not its people. However, if one goes by evidence, as some here on PDF argue adamantly, it does not exist.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom