What's new

Pakistan Army chief asks officers to read book on success of Indian democracy

Status
Not open for further replies.
There are better examples of democracy like USA, Japan, and UK.

Why look at Indian democracy?
Besides the source is a Indian source.
 
you can simply mention and that is it......

The OP reproduced the text of an article. If you had actually bothered to read the article you would have seen it clearly mentions the source - The Nation - at para 2.

Instead you simply looked at the link (which was to Hindustan Times) and posted a silly rant about 'fake' news, Indian conspiracy, Bharti source, and some other nonsense.

In short: Please read a news story before commenting.
 
There are better examples of democracy like USA, Japan, and UK.

Why look at Indian democracy?
Besides the source is a Indian source.

That was an Indian source and here, how another source published it..... Hence, the subject is not Indian democracy that Indian Media is trying to prove but subject was....

Coordination, not competition, with civilians
The Army Chief’s Glasnost
February 13, 2017
SHARE :
Salman Masood

inShare


ISLAMABAD - The gathering of senior army officers of Rawalpindi Garrison sat alert in the General Headquarters auditorium and listened to their chief intently. It was the last week of December and Gen Qamar Javed Bajwa, the army chief, had been into the top job just weeks earlier. The general delivered his first speech – an articulation of his vision – as the new army chief in a poised manner and communicated it to his officers in unequivocal terms. The army has no business trying to run the government, the general said. The army must remain within its constitutionally defined role, he stressed. Gen Bajwa also alluded that an impression of a competition between the civilians and the military is counter-productive for the country. And, apart from other professional advice, he urged officers to read a book “Army and Nation”, written by Steven I Wilkinson.

The almost 300-page book makes for an interesting reading as it details why the democratic process in India has been a success. Wilkinson, a professor of Political Science and International Relations at Yale University, explores the command and control strategies, the careful ethnic balancing and political, foreign policy and strategic decisions that made the army not to interfere in Indian democracy.

Wilkinson argues that India took a number of steps after partition to correct the civil-military imbalance. It greatly helped that Indian Congress was a broad-based political party and better institutionalised than the Muslim League, which, in the first decade after partition, was unable to provide political stability and legitimacy.

The military in India is also not seen as an attractive avenue of employment, unlike in the 1930s, when high officer salaries, land patronage, tax remissions and other incentives made the military a coveted career. India has reduced the roles of ethnic groups within its military and no singular group threatens or overshadows the rest. After the 1962 war with China, India has been aggressive in trying the “balance outside the army” with a huge increase in paramilitary forces. However, back here, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s attempt to raise a parallel paramilitary force, FSF, failed.

Now that it’s the third month since his ascension to the powerful position, it can be discerned that while Gen Bajwa believes in civilian supremacy, he will also not do anything that upends that existing structures and dynamics. When a controversy broke out recently about land allocated to the former army chief, Gen (r) Raheel Sharif, a sharp, almost edgy, rebuttal came from the military.

However, the comparison between the personal styles of Gen Sharif and Gen Bajwa cannot be starker. While the previous army chief basked and glowed under the glare of television and press cameras, Gen Bajwa likes to go about his job without pomp and show. His trips to the frontlines or speeches to troops have lacked the breathless coverage that was the defining factor of former army chief’s tenure. Till now, there has been no attempt to portray Gen Bajwa as a parallel, competing powerhouse, with strong political undertones, unlike the past when an orchestrated campaign was directed and aimed at raising the profile of the then army chief to mythic proportions. It cast a long shadow over the civilian leaders.

Gen Bajwa, through his public statements, has stressed that the army will support and assist the civilian government for national interest. “United we rise” is the theme adopted by the military and its media wing under the leadership of the new army chief, officials say.

The civilians can draw comfort from these initial indicators and feel relieved that no efforts to destabilise the political system will emanate from the garrison city. But it should also not lull them into a false sense of security or complacency. The political system will get more strength and legitimacy from their own acts and conduct. Good governance, transparent accountability and zero tolerance for corruption – from top to bottom – are only the first steps towards a stable, democratic country, not constantly threatened by the possibility of a military coup.





Coordination, not competition, with civilians

The OP reproduced the text of an article. If you had actually bothered to read the article you would have seen it clearly mentions the source - The Nation - at para 2.

Instead you simply looked at the link (which was to Hindustan Times) and posted a silly rant about 'fake' news, Indian conspiracy, Bharti source, and some other nonsense.

In short: Please read a news story before commenting.


You are still repeating the same again & again for nothing. You are just stooping at a level to get personal here that in my opinion is not right so again, be civil.

Open your eyes and read through another source.... get the message and take some rest so may not cross the line in future for a conversation.... Where it says anything about to inspire with success of Indian Democracy..... but Indian Media only.......

Coordination, not competition, with civilians
The Army Chief’s Glasnost
February 13, 2017
SHARE :
Salman Masood

ISLAMABAD - The gathering of senior army officers of Rawalpindi Garrison sat alert in the General Headquarters auditorium and listened to their chief intently. It was the last week of December and Gen Qamar Javed Bajwa, the army chief, had been into the top job just weeks earlier. The general delivered his first speech – an articulation of his vision – as the new army chief in a poised manner and communicated it to his officers in unequivocal terms. The army has no business trying to run the government, the general said. The army must remain within its constitutionally defined role, he stressed. Gen Bajwa also alluded that an impression of a competition between the civilians and the military is counter-productive for the country. And, apart from other professional advice, he urged officers to read a book “Army and Nation”, written by Steven I Wilkinson.

The almost 300-page book makes for an interesting reading as it details why the democratic process in India has been a success. Wilkinson, a professor of Political Science and International Relations at Yale University, explores the command and control strategies, the careful ethnic balancing and political, foreign policy and strategic decisions that made the army not to interfere in Indian democracy.

Wilkinson argues that India took a number of steps after partition to correct the civil-military imbalance. It greatly helped that Indian Congress was a broad-based political party and better institutionalised than the Muslim League, which, in the first decade after partition, was unable to provide political stability and legitimacy.

The military in India is also not seen as an attractive avenue of employment, unlike in the 1930s, when high officer salaries, land patronage, tax remissions and other incentives made the military a coveted career. India has reduced the roles of ethnic groups within its military and no singular group threatens or overshadows the rest. After the 1962 war with China, India has been aggressive in trying the “balance outside the army” with a huge increase in paramilitary forces. However, back here, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s attempt to raise a parallel paramilitary force, FSF, failed.

Now that it’s the third month since his ascension to the powerful position, it can be discerned that while Gen Bajwa believes in civilian supremacy, he will also not do anything that upends that existing structures and dynamics. When a controversy broke out recently about land allocated to the former army chief, Gen (r) Raheel Sharif, a sharp, almost edgy, rebuttal came from the military.

However, the comparison between the personal styles of Gen Sharif and Gen Bajwa cannot be starker. While the previous army chief basked and glowed under the glare of television and press cameras, Gen Bajwa likes to go about his job without pomp and show. His trips to the frontlines or speeches to troops have lacked the breathless coverage that was the defining factor of former army chief’s tenure. Till now, there has been no attempt to portray Gen Bajwa as a parallel, competing powerhouse, with strong political undertones, unlike the past when an orchestrated campaign was directed and aimed at raising the profile of the then army chief to mythic proportions. It cast a long shadow over the civilian leaders.

Gen Bajwa, through his public statements, has stressed that the army will support and assist the civilian government for national interest. “United we rise” is the theme adopted by the military and its media wing under the leadership of the new army chief, officials say.

The civilians can draw comfort from these initial indicators and feel relieved that no efforts to destabilise the political system will emanate from the garrison city. But it should also not lull them into a false sense of security or complacency. The political system will get more strength and legitimacy from their own acts and conduct. Good governance, transparent accountability and zero tolerance for corruption – from top to bottom – are only the first steps towards a stable, democratic country, not constantly threatened by the possibility of a military coup.

Coordination, not competition, with civilians
 
I am also admirer of political system in India and we should learn from our eastern border. There is no shame in learning from your enemy.
But, most important, Pak army should mind his own business and stay f*** out of Politics. Our civilian govt corrupt or not. They are our leaders and we have choose them by our votes. There is no mandate given to Army to crush the basic right of voting.
 
When you have moron acting on foreign ideologies and breaking the country to get their own power seats, then military has every right to interfere...all the problems we see in Pakistan today emerged from civilian governments trying to appease the mullahs for their own vote bank politics.
 
You are still repeating the same again & again for nothing. You are just stooping at a level to get personal here that in my opinion is not right so again, be civil.

You do not seem to understand. I will spell it for you once more - and that is the limit of my ability.

Please read your original post where you attack Indian media / news etc. for a bunch of reasons before reading the content of the article which very clearly mentioned the source as a Pakistani newspaper.

The content of Salman Masood's article is quite consistent with the Hindustan Times story. Nearly half of the substantive reference to Wilkinson's book is with reference to the completely different way the army as as institution has developed in India. I can appreciate that Masood would not use such a headline in a Pakistani newspaper but content-wise I don't see any distortion by HT. They have only printed what would be politically incorrect in Pakistan.
 
You do not seem to understand. I will spell it for you once more - and that is the limit of my ability.

Please read your original post where you attack Indian media / news etc. for a bunch of reasons before reading the content of the article which very clearly mentioned the source as a Pakistani newspaper.

The content of Salman Masood's article is quite consistent with the Hindustan Times story. Nearly half of the substantive reference to Wilkinson's book is with reference to the completely different way the army as as institution has developed in India. I can appreciate that Masood would not use such a headline in a Pakistani newspaper but content-wise I don't see any distortion by HT. They have only printed what would be politically incorrect in Pakistan.

That proves my point that Indian Media has an agenda to deliberately praise Indian Democracy by painting it with COAS of Pakistan which is not the case. As now Indian Source is contradictory, you are coming with the statement that Pakistan media is controversial in this account. Why would Salman use a headline which is not the case but only quoted by Indian Media and right there, you denied to accept but accusing others for xyz. The headline has no relation with the statement of COAS at all but it is said that, COAS urged about Army's role to support democracy and not interfere in political matters that I have no issue to read and learn from anyone including enemy..... but subject was not the success of Indian Democracy.... There is no such relation that Pakistan's COAS would be speaking about success of Indian Democracy which is not his interest nor his type to do so. If you can contradict a Pakistani source out-rightly without any substance but mere assumption then others do have a remedy to evaluate the Indian source and its intention for publishing the forged/fabricated headline which is no where discussed by COAS of Pakistan.
 
I am also admirer of political system in India and we should learn from our eastern border. There is no shame in learning from your enemy.
But, most important, Pak army should mind his own business and stay f*** out of Politics. Our civilian govt corrupt or not. They are our leaders and we have choose them by our votes. There is no mandate given to Army to crush the basic right of voting.

Excellent. I was awaiting for this sort of post for a long time.
 
Next time you will see India media publish news talking about Xi Jiping praising India model as a success while China is a failure. India model in ten years time will make India be a 20trillon USDeconomy while China will collapse in a day. :rofl:
 
There are better examples of democracy such as USA, Canada, Australia, UK, etc. others.
Why look at India.
 
Next time you will see India media publish news talking about Xi Jiping praising India model as a success while China is a failure. India model in ten years time will make India be a 20trillon USDeconomy while China will collapse in a day. :rofl:
Even it does, it will probably be censored and blocked by China - so no need to sweat.

There are better examples of democracy such as USA, Canada, Australia, UK, etc. others.
Why look at India.
Because both countries became independent at the same time and followed different trajectories?
 
India cannot challenge China, India just doesn't have the resources.
 
Even it does, it will probably be censored and blocked by China - so no need to sweat.


Because both countries became independent at the same time and followed different trajectories?
You mean USA and U.K. Sensor India news? Such kind of trash news is not for China media consumption:lol:
 
This Shows the Merit of Character of Gen Bajwa....

Learn any good thing, even though from your Foe.

Respects to Bajwa....
 
You mean USA and U.K. Sensor India news? Such kind of trash news is not for China media consumption:lol:
No, I understand it is difficult to comprehend English for some. If some Chinese member with better English skills could translate my post for you, it would be helpful.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom