Army chief holds off generals seeking Pakistan PM's ouster

[Chak Bamu]

No my friend: no speculations are there at all. It is on the basis of quite some study and "neighbor watching" over some decades.
You have thrown in some names etc. But they are all irrelevant. Irrelevant since there is a "systemic juggernaut" at work. As it has been for so long.
Gen.Shareef may not be in the 'coup business'. But that does not mean that every (present) General is not, just as every General in the past was not in the 'coup business'. That 'Institution' run on the basis of "consensus". Ironically; it has close to Democratic norms of functioning when it comes to political stances. Save in the instances where an overarching and overbearing Gernail was at the helm. There is a reason for that adherence to (a seemingly) Democratic norm. The basic reason is : the primary instinct of the "survival of the Institution". That over-rides every other consideration on earth. Which is what I've said before.

Now going back to the "script": it required that NS must be defanged or emasculated. Rather than eliminated. Elimination was not an option. The 'Institution' is not as strong as it was in the past; either within the Estt or in the public eye. Even international (mainly Amreekan) opinion is not favorable. What has been achieved instead is a far "smarter" achievement!

Mind you; I am no admirer of NS, he is simply a perfect idiot. Just as PTI and TUQ are perfect pawns.
Then; what are the Awaam?

Over the last few days, the course of events belie the view that a 'soft coup' was the end-goal. The goal was a regular coup like the last one in Bangladesh. But a number of things went wrong, it seems.

NS is no idiot. PML-N got carried away and their ministers made idiotic mistakes. There was no need to keep harping on Musharraf. There was no need to talk much at all about Army. It was best to stay silent like NS.

In any case, this is my last post on the subject. I've already said enough.

Not speculating, nor trolling, but it's pretty clear when the Chief himself isn't confident of the backing of his corps commanders. What does that mean? Probably dissension within the ranks? According to the Reuters article in the OP.........


So what about the rest of the generals and the chief? Why were they all not on the same page where this serious situation was concerned? They are supposed to follow the orders of the chief come what may, not pull in different directions.

Of course that article may be outright exaggeration by some journalists and politicians bent upon sensationalism and scoring brownie points. I just commented on what was written as I don't have first hand knowledge myself.

Article writer got info from Ch. Nisar and couple of interviews and then wrote this article. Its not like word from heavens. This article gives incomplete info and with a bit of bias that comes from her sources. One needs to see that for sure. Do not treat is like infallible stuff etc...

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Over the last few days, the course of events belie the view that a 'soft coup' was the end-goal. The goal was a regular coup like the last one in Bangladesh. But a number of things went wrong, it seems.

NS is no idiot. PML-N got carried away and their ministers made idiotic mistakes. There was no need to keep harping on Musharraf. There was no need to talk much at all about Army. It was best to stay silent like NS.

In any case, this is my last post on the subject. I've already said enough.

...

Fair enough. You are entitled to that.

Of course; over time, I am also learning more about 'coups'. That there are varieties like 'regular coups' and 'soft coups'. So is this a 'creeping coup'?
But the task has been achieved.......... NS is cut down in size.

 

[VCheng]

Not speculating, nor trolling, but it's pretty clear when the Chief himself isn't confident of the backing of his corps commanders. What does that mean? Probably dissension within the ranks? According to the Reuters article in the OP.........


So what about the rest of the generals and the chief? Why were they all not on the same page where this serious situation was concerned? They are supposed to follow the orders of the chief come what may, not pull in different directions.

Of course that article may be outright exaggeration by some journalists and politicians bent upon sensationalism and scoring brownie points. I just commented on what was written as I don't have first hand knowledge myself.

When Corps Commanders meet, everybody speaks their mind. The discussion is always detailed, and the decision is never unanimous. But once taken, they all support it. That is the correct way to do it.

 

[OrionHunter]

When Corps Commanders meet, everybody speaks their mind. The discussion is always detailed, and the decision is never unanimous. But once taken, they all support it. That is the correct way to do it.

Check this out...

General Sharif also inherited the current team of commanders from his predecessor when he took over the top job last year, making him less secure of his position, insiders said.

But with five top security officials due to retire next month, he has a chance to appoint his own men.

"It's hard to imagine an army chief trying to actively intervene or do something drastic when he isn't 100 percent sure his team will back him," said a defence ministry source.

"Next month ... he will have four of his own Corps Commanders. He'll have his own intelligence chief. Then he'll be a man to watch out for."

Army chief holds off generals seeking Pakistan PM's ouster| Reuters

Well, what does one make of this? Everything doesn't seem to be hunky dory!

 

[VCheng]

Well, what does one make of this? Everything doesn't seem to be hunky dory!

That is the point: It is never "hunky dory". Every Corps Commander speaks out his mind, but then they all support whatever the group decision is, 100%.