What's new

Pakistan crisis puts army back in the driving seat

gubbi

SENIOR MEMBER
Feb 25, 2009
4,488
1
4,343
Country
India
Location
United States
Less the Army, more about supporters of Musharraf in the Army and retired officers. Qadri and Ik are their game to get Musharraf out of the mix and have him flee.
How is that a more corrupt (according to you guys) politician like Zardari could hold on to the reigns of power for his full term (and also the PPP govt), but a "popular" Punjabi politician like NS faces so much ire and discontent among the masses and the army? How and why was the army silent during Zardari's spell? Speaks a lot about his capability of being a politician, no?
Although I have heard many a sentiment of Zardari being disliked, he knew how to play the field 'fairly' (i.e. in political terms). IMHO, for Pakistan to be a real democracy, it needs such politicians atleast for the short term future.
 

Bang Galore

ELITE MEMBER
Feb 21, 2010
10,685
12
22,736
Country
India
Location
India
How is that a more corrupt (according to you guys) politician like Zardari could hold on to the reigns of power for his full term (and also the PPP govt), but a "popular" Punjabi politician like NS faces so much ire and discontent among the masses and the army? How and why was the army silent during Zardari's spell? Speaks a lot about his capability of being a politician, no?
Although I have heard many a sentiment of Zardari being disliked, he knew how to play the field 'fairly' (i.e. in political terms). IMHO, for Pakistan to be a real democracy, it needs such politicians atleast for the short term future.
NS seems to be a more foolish politician. He "selected" an army chief of his choice(same as the last time with Musharraf) who is then obliged to prove to the army that he is his own boss & no one's lackey. Putting in the senior-most in that position would have removed that problem since that CoAS would have seen it (his elevation) as a procedural right rather than a favour & would not need to prove anything. Secondly, being stubborn about Musharraf even after the Army expressed its unhappiness means that he simply does not learn his lessons very well. No matter what his animosity, it would have been far better for him to have done a favour to the Generals by releasing his "enemy" rather than get into a confrontation where they don't like him in the least. Magnanimity might have worked a lot better than cussedness to the grave.
 

Chak Bamu

RETIRED MOD
Jan 3, 2013
4,489
68
7,319
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Pmln has something to hide and that's why it's objections have lead to this, what you expect from ethnic minded party who came to power on slogans of jaag Punjab jaag.
That was more than twenty years ago in reaction to 'Sindh-card'. You need to d some research. After 1997 election results, all these things died away. You are a little late here.

Let the army a institution we respected make a blunder and then we will go to civil war, we will free all pakistan and if some don't want to be freed then we will go our own way.
You are a nutcase for advocating civil war. First you accuse Army, now you saying that you want to see if they make a mistake. It is hard to take you seriously.
 

Informant

SENIOR MEMBER
Sep 11, 2013
4,436
-5
4,234
Country
United States
Location
Pakistan
Army is supporting nawaz and rejecting and labeling khan as western influenced because army would favour the ethnic group it is predominantly from it has done that before and this time is no different.



We have openly said let there be verification west of the indus too as we don't want any form of rigging from any party.

Pmln has something to hide and that's why it's objections have lead to this, what you expect from ethnic minded party who came to power on slogans of jaag Punjab jaag.

Let the army a institution we respected make a blunder and then we will go to civil war, we will free all pakistan and if some don't want to be freed then we will go our own way.
Man such bombs of knowledge. Army is supporting N? Really? Have you been in the army? Do you interact with people in the armed forces? Seriously it is one institute that is secular. Where being Punjabi carries no weight. All that matters is politics and thats it. Civil war? Rest assured idiots like you will be alone. Smoked out and burnt out. You will never achieve "your way" get that drilled into your head. I speak this as a Pakistani, not a Punjabi.

N used the Punjab slogan once, and he recanted it since long. He used it to counter MQM and Sindhi ultra nationalists. It was wrong of Noora. Punjab by far is the most welcoming of provinces, unlike yours where Punjabi laborers get gunned down just for being Punjabi. Not a dig at you as you are my brother, but cut your bs holier than thou attitude.

@Hyperion @DESERT FIGHTER
 

Rude_Striker

FULL MEMBER
Jun 2, 2014
253
1
99
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
How is that a more corrupt (according to you guys) politician like Zardari could hold on to the reigns of power for his full term (and also the PPP govt), but a "popular" Punjabi politician like NS faces so much ire and discontent among the masses and the army? How and why was the army silent during Zardari's spell? Speaks a lot about his capability of being a politician, no?
Although I have heard many a sentiment of Zardari being disliked, he knew how to play the field 'fairly' (i.e. in political terms). IMHO, for Pakistan to be a real democracy, it needs such politicians atleast for the short term future.
I don't think Mr.Zardari is a good politician ,he is just too good at playing the good guy.And if you call his politics the real politics then I don't know man coz I define politics differently.
 

Chak Bamu

RETIRED MOD
Jan 3, 2013
4,489
68
7,319
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
NS seems to be a more foolish politician. He "selected" an army chief of his choice(same as the last time with Musharraf) who is then obliged to prove to the army that he is his own boss & no one's lackey. Putting in the senior-most in that position would have removed that problem since that CoAS would have seen it (his elevation) as a procedural right rather than a favour & would not need to prove anything. Secondly, being stubborn about Musharraf even after the Army expressed its unhappiness means that he simply does not learn his lessons very well. No matter what his animosity, it would have been far better for him to have done a favour to the Generals by releasing his "enemy" rather than get into a confrontation where they don't like him in the least. Magnanimity might have worked a lot better than cussedness to the grave.
There is more to it than a simple dynamic as you described.

Every COAS is bound by the interests of PA which they identify with that of the country in a security perspective. It is not possible to go against that to begin with. Most people support Army. Our politicians just have to improve their game. NS has some congenital faults that make themselves felt each time he assumes power.
 

gubbi

SENIOR MEMBER
Feb 25, 2009
4,488
1
4,343
Country
India
Location
United States
I don't think Mr.Zardari is a good politician ,he is just too good at playing the good guy.And if you call his politics the real politics then I don't know man coz I define politics differently.
That's exactly why he is a very good politician. Politics is the last refuge of the scoundrels! One has to be very good at playing the game and IMHO, Zardari beats the rest of the lot in Pakistan. He even had the Pak Army reigns in his hands!! Now which politician in Pakistan can lay claim to such an achievement?
baddua na den bhai rehim!!! :D:D:D
Haali jo baddua lag rrahi hein, mustaqbil mein wohi dua lagegi.
 

Umair Nawaz

BANNED
Sep 10, 2012
13,101
-20
11,432
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Army is supporting nawaz and rejecting and labeling khan as western influenced because army would favour the ethnic group it is predominantly from it has done that before and this time is no different.



y.
dont open yr tiny mouth if u know nothing abt greatness of our armed forces.
 

qamar1990

BANNED
Apr 25, 2012
5,885
-4
5,666
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
<MOD EDIT> NO NEED TO GLOAT AND FIND A WAY TO BROADCAST YOUR BIASES. I HAVE DELETED YOUR FIRST LINE FOR BEING OBNOXIOUS <MOD EDIT>

Pakistan crisis puts army back in the driving seat
Reuters | Aug 20, 2014, 02.55 AM IST

ISLAMABAD: As tens of thousands of protesters advanced on the Pakistani capital last week to demand his resignation, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif dispatched two emissaries to consult with the army chief.

He wanted to know if the military was quietly engineering the twin protest movements by cricket star-turned-politician Imran Khan and activist cleric Tahir ul-Qadri, or if, perhaps, it was preparing to stage a coup.

According to a government insider with a first-hand account of the meeting, Sharif's envoys returned with good news and bad: there will be no coup, but if he wants his government to survive, from now on it will have to "share space with the army".

Even if, as seems likely, the Khan and Qadri protests eventually fizzle out due to a lack of overt support from the military, the prime minister will emerge weakened from the crisis.

The army may have saved his skin, but its price will be subservience to the generals on issues he wanted to handle himself — from the fight against the Taliban to relations with arch foe India and Pakistan's role in neighbouring, post-NATO Afghanistan.

"The biggest loser will be Nawaz, cut down to size both by puny political rivals and the powerful army," said a government minister who asked not to be named. "From this moment on, he'll always be looking over his shoulder."



A year ago, few would have predicted that Sharif would be in such trouble: back then, he had just swept to power for a third time in a milestone poll that marked nuclear-armed Pakistan's first transition from one elected government to another.

But in the months that followed, Sharif — who had crossed swords with the army in the past — moved to enhance the clout of the civilian government in a country that has been ruled by the military for more than half of its turbulent history.

He irked the generals by putting former military head Pervez Musharraf, who had abruptly ended his last stint as prime minister in a 1999 coup, on trial for treason.

Sharif also opposed a military offensive to crush Taliban insurgents, sided with a media group that had accused the military of shooting one of its journalists and sought reconciliation with India, the perceived threat that the army uses to justify its huge budget and national importance.

India rapprochement at risk

Sources in Sharif's government said that, with civilian-military relations in such bad shape, Sharif suspected that the street protests to unseat him were being manipulated from behind the scenes by the army.

He also feared that, if the agitations turned violent, the army would exploit the situation to seize power for itself.

However, the two close aides who went to see army chief Raheel Sharif in the garrison town of Rawalpindi last Wednesday were told that the military had no intention of intervening.


"The military does not intend to carry out a coup but ... if the government wants to get through its many problems and the four remaining years of its term, it has to share space with the army," said the insider, summing up the message they were given.

"Sharing space" is a familiar euphemism for civilian governments focusing narrowly on domestic political affairs and leaving security and strategic policy to the army.

The army's media wing declined to comment on the meeting.

The fact that the military is back in the driving seat will make it harder for Sharif to deliver the rapprochement with India that he promised when he won the election last year.

Indian media speculated this week that Sharif had already been forced by the generals to scuttle peace talks.

New Delhi on Monday called off a meeting between foreign ministry officials of the two countries, which had been set to take place on August 25, because Pakistan announced its intention to consult Kashmiri separatists ahead of the meeting.

The Pakistani army's predominance could also mean it could torpedo the government's relationship with Afghanistan, where a regional jostle for influence is expected to intensify after the withdrawal of most foreign forces at the end of this year.

Paying the price

Few believed that the army would back Khan's bid for power even if it used him to put Sharif on the defensive.

"Even the army knows that Imran Khan may be a great pressure cooker in the kitchen, but you can't trust him to be the chef," said a former intelligence chief who declined to be named.

Sharif may now pay the price for miscalculating that the military might have been willing to let the one-time cricket hero topple him.

"Thinking that Imran could be a game-changer, Nawaz has conceded the maximum to the army," a Sharif aide said.

"From a czar-like prime minister, they (the army) have reduced him to a deputy commissioner-type character who will deal with the day-to-day running of the country while they take care of the important stuff like Afghanistan and India. This is not a small loss."

But Sharif's aides say a stint in jail under Musharraf, followed by exile from Pakistan and five years as leader of the opposition party, have made him realize that he needs to share power to survive.

"This is not the old Nawaz, the wild confrontationalist," said an adviser to the prime minister in Lahore, the capital of his Punjab province power base. "This is the new Nawaz who has learnt the hard way that politics is about living to fight another day."Pakistan crisis puts army back in the driving seat - The Times of India
stop teasing us…
 

Bang Galore

ELITE MEMBER
Feb 21, 2010
10,685
12
22,736
Country
India
Location
India
Every COAS is bound by the interests of PA which they identify with that of the country in a security perspective. It is not possible to go against that to begin with. Most people support Army. Our politicians just have to improve their game. NS has some congenital faults that make themselves felt each time he assumes power.
I'm not for a moment believing that the only dynamics that exist in how a CoAS acts are fully captured in my argument, only that one could start on a better foot with someone who respects the PM fallowing a procedure rather than picking a favourite. You are right that PA's interpretation may possibly be different from the civilian government but absent animosity right at the beginning, the chances of resolving such matters to mutual satisfaction are higher than in the present case.
 

VelocuR

SENIOR MEMBER
Jun 4, 2009
6,210
5
7,256
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
<MOD EDIT> NO NEED TO GLOAT AND FIND A WAY TO BROADCAST YOUR BIASES. I HAVE DELETED YOUR FIRST LINE FOR BEING OBNOXIOUS <MOD EDIT>

Pakistan crisis puts army back in the driving seat
Reuters | Aug 20, 2014, 02.55 AM IST

ISLAMABAD: As tens of thousands of protesters advanced on the Pakistani capital last week to demand his resignation, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif dispatched two emissaries to consult with the army chief.

He wanted to know if the military was quietly engineering the twin protest movements by cricket star-turned-politician Imran Khan and activist cleric Tahir ul-Qadri, or if, perhaps, it was preparing to stage a coup.

According to a government insider with a first-hand account of the meeting, Sharif's envoys returned with good news and bad: there will be no coup, but if he wants his government to survive, from now on it will have to "share space with the army".

Even if, as seems likely, the Khan and Qadri protests eventually fizzle out due to a lack of overt support from the military, the prime minister will emerge weakened from the crisis.

The army may have saved his skin, but its price will be subservience to the generals on issues he wanted to handle himself — from the fight against the Taliban to relations with arch foe India and Pakistan's role in neighbouring, post-NATO Afghanistan.

"The biggest loser will be Nawaz, cut down to size both by puny political rivals and the powerful army," said a government minister who asked not to be named. "From this moment on, he'll always be looking over his shoulder."



A year ago, few would have predicted that Sharif would be in such trouble: back then, he had just swept to power for a third time in a milestone poll that marked nuclear-armed Pakistan's first transition from one elected government to another.

But in the months that followed, Sharif — who had crossed swords with the army in the past — moved to enhance the clout of the civilian government in a country that has been ruled by the military for more than half of its turbulent history.

He irked the generals by putting former military head Pervez Musharraf, who had abruptly ended his last stint as prime minister in a 1999 coup, on trial for treason.

Sharif also opposed a military offensive to crush Taliban insurgents, sided with a media group that had accused the military of shooting one of its journalists and sought reconciliation with India, the perceived threat that the army uses to justify its huge budget and national importance.

India rapprochement at risk

Sources in Sharif's government said that, with civilian-military relations in such bad shape, Sharif suspected that the street protests to unseat him were being manipulated from behind the scenes by the army.

He also feared that, if the agitations turned violent, the army would exploit the situation to seize power for itself.

However, the two close aides who went to see army chief Raheel Sharif in the garrison town of Rawalpindi last Wednesday were told that the military had no intention of intervening.


"The military does not intend to carry out a coup but ... if the government wants to get through its many problems and the four remaining years of its term, it has to share space with the army," said the insider, summing up the message they were given.

"Sharing space" is a familiar euphemism for civilian governments focusing narrowly on domestic political affairs and leaving security and strategic policy to the army.

The army's media wing declined to comment on the meeting.

The fact that the military is back in the driving seat will make it harder for Sharif to deliver the rapprochement with India that he promised when he won the election last year.

Indian media speculated this week that Sharif had already been forced by the generals to scuttle peace talks.

New Delhi on Monday called off a meeting between foreign ministry officials of the two countries, which had been set to take place on August 25, because Pakistan announced its intention to consult Kashmiri separatists ahead of the meeting.

The Pakistani army's predominance could also mean it could torpedo the government's relationship with Afghanistan, where a regional jostle for influence is expected to intensify after the withdrawal of most foreign forces at the end of this year.

Paying the price

Few believed that the army would back Khan's bid for power even if it used him to put Sharif on the defensive.

"Even the army knows that Imran Khan may be a great pressure cooker in the kitchen, but you can't trust him to be the chef," said a former intelligence chief who declined to be named.

Sharif may now pay the price for miscalculating that the military might have been willing to let the one-time cricket hero topple him.

"Thinking that Imran could be a game-changer, Nawaz has conceded the maximum to the army," a Sharif aide said.

"From a czar-like prime minister, they (the army) have reduced him to a deputy commissioner-type character who will deal with the day-to-day running of the country while they take care of the important stuff like Afghanistan and India. This is not a small loss."

But Sharif's aides say a stint in jail under Musharraf, followed by exile from Pakistan and five years as leader of the opposition party, have made him realize that he needs to share power to survive.

"This is not the old Nawaz, the wild confrontationalist," said an adviser to the prime minister in Lahore, the capital of his Punjab province power base. "This is the new Nawaz who has learnt the hard way that politics is about living to fight another day."Pakistan crisis puts army back in the driving seat - The Times of India
India's typical propaganda.

:tdown::tdown::tdown::tdown::tdown::tdown::tdown::tdown::tdown::tdown::tdown::tdown::tdown:
 

Didact

FULL MEMBER
May 5, 2014
414
22
1,374
Country
India
Location
India
India's typical propaganda.

:tdown::tdown::tdown::tdown::tdown::tdown::tdown::tdown::tdown::tdown::tdown::tdown::tdown:
Well, Ahem, Actually, this article is by Reuters, and the writer is one Mehreen Zahra-Malik, who is a Pakistani. You didn't even read the first word, like literally, the first word after the heading.......

But of course if you're going to declare Reuters a propaganda mouthpiece of GOI and the Pakistani reporter a closet Indian, I concede my position without further argument.
 

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


Top Bottom