What's new

CHIEF DON'Ts : Talat Hussain

A great analysis by Talat Hussain. He has delivered serious blows to all the pomp and show of the military establishment and their usual false bravado of being a great war machine.

He has rightly berated the focus of the military on media management rather than battle management.

Army fanboys can fume all they want but these are changing times when these sanctimonious generals are openly criticised and ridiculed just like politicians in accordance with democratic norms of free speech.

Boot lickers can only resort to the usual allegations of being traitors, Nooras, RAW agents, fifth columnists, lifafas, liberal fascists, murtids, kafirs, false-flaggers, blah blah blah. :lol::lol::lol:
 
. .
The new army chief, General Qamar Javed Bajwa, has his work cut out. In the crucial years that lie ahead, his to-do list is long. But this list is also predictable. There is belligerent Delhi, scheming Kabul, badly-inclined Iran and the new face of terrorism, the Islamic State, drawing dispersed groups on our own land.

However, the less-imagined is his don’t list. This list, if prepared dispassionately, can bring greater clarity towards the tasks at hand. In preparing the don’t list, the COAS can learn from his predecessor, General (r) Raheel Sharif. And what he needs to learn essentially is how not to be like him in several key respects.

In the first instance, the new chief has to revive the army’s institutionalised decision and planning mechanism that has been severely damaged by General Raheel’s endless self-projection and self-centeredness. Many unfortunate consequences flowed from this policy. One, everything flowed towards the person of the COAS, and the rest of the institution was marginalised in what represented the entire army in the public sphere. Press releases and tweets in praise of the general’s activities substituted what ought to have been articulation of collective weight and wisdom of senior commanders on serious matters.

It is true that the army is not a parliament of equals: the one who sits at the head carries the maximum authority. But it is not a one-man rule institution either. It cannot be in the modern day and age. The army chief’s personal profile has to reflect the institution’s deliberated and studied policy. The new COAS can bring this side of his office back to life and put a reasonable ceiling on his personal media profile that touched insane heights under his predecessor.

The second consequence of General Raheel’s media-domination strategy was the tendency to commit to irrational goals that were militarily nebulous but did resonate with a public addicted to the mumbo jumbo of quick-fixes. So the big claims went something like this: terrorism has been eliminated; terrorists have been totally neutralised; parts of Fata are close to becoming Switzerland; by December all internally displaced families will be back in their homes; Pakistan’s borders have become totally secure. The list goes on and on.

This excessive embellishment of modest gains created exceptionally embarrassing situations. When in the middle of tall claims spectacular terrorist attacks happened there were no answers to be given only more bluster and more rhetoric. In this year alone, there have been close to 400 violations of Pakistan’s territorial perimeter from the eastern and north-western sides. Three years’ tally sits close 800. Now that is a scary figure but one that underscores the precarious nature of the country’s external environment and demands thoughtful deliberations.

Almost 80,000 families (some 800,000 people) still await return to their homes. This is a grim reality that rains on the pompous parade of achievements. A military commander’s claims must be borne out by facts. The new army chief must bring some realism to posturing on success and resist the temptation of playing to the gallery at the cost of professional credibility.

The third consequence of General Raheel’s media manoeuvre was to create a bubble of political expectations and let a vast group of jackals, hyenas and vultures constantly chase the potential hunt that was the sitting government. There can be many reasons to insist that the Nawaz government doesn’t deserve to be in power and early elections should be considered a serious possibility, but all paths to this change must go through the constitutional door.

On General Raheel’s watch there were any number of events that bordered on conspiracy to oust the sitting government through suspect methods, and his command was seen playing an underhand hand in this trouble by stoking the image of ‘change being imminent’. A countless number of times his name showed up on posters, in campaigns, as a third umpire in protests and in serious conversations across the diplomatic tables about causing the government to collapse and yet not once did he officially disassociate the army or himself from this amazing drama of hopes and dreams.

Generally, the army chief’s office, like all high offices, is exceptionally sensitive to needless controversies. That was exhibited recently when the head of a banned organisation tried to hurl an insane charge against one of the five candidates for the office of army chief but was slapped down so hard that he had to issue a rebuttal in less than 24 hours. This happened because he was told to take back his words and not play dirty politics with a name that could become the army chief. He obliged. He understood the consequences of not obliging.

That’s how neutrality can be ensured, and how effectively an important office can be protected from being used for petty gains by others. General Raheel did not do that. While he never crossed the constitutional line beyond which lies the murky world of coups, he allowed his name to float around scandalously close to the constitutionally alien territory.

There is reason to believe that a veritable army of crystal-ball gazers was nurtured. They vented their venom on screen as information for years, making a complete fool of this nation and pretending to represent the ‘Raheel thinking’. They operated with impunity. They cited ‘defence sources’ freely. They claimed they had been briefed. They had more ‘leaks’ from high security meetings than any hard-working journalist can dream of. They toured Fata. They sat in formal briefings and benefited from informal conversations where news agendas were set. They were never stopped as they marinated their declared goals against a sitting government in General Raheel’s deep praise.

This was accompanied by deliberate myth-building around Gen Raheel as the ‘greatest general’ to have ever walked the face of this country. Every step he took to go to his office was made to sound like a favour to the nation. Every ordinary visitor who complimented him out of courtesy was shown as an endorsement of his exceptional leadership. Every customary medal or an official sash given by the hosts was catapulted to the level of the Victoria Cross. Politicians repeated the hand-written script of greatness because sucking up to the chief of army staff is a long tradition. The media lapped up, or had to lap up, the official line. Others reinforced this image because this made them look ‘so patriotic’. So the folklore spread far and wide.

This was needless. Being the chief of the Pakistan Army is legendary enough. When a nuclear-armed force of under a million is at your disposal, you are very, very important already. You don’t need dubious everymen to become your brand ambassadors. Allowing them to play this role is to deface the office of the army chief. The new army chief needs to cut himself off from this sorry tradition of his name being debated freely in useless political conversations made by frivolous men and women.

And finally the new chief must bring military operations like Zarb-e-Azb out of the temple of mindless worship to the hard planning board of the military directorate (which is where an army chief has to be seen instead of on screen at PR functions). Operation Zarb-e-Azb is an important operation with results but is also a continuation of previous equally important operations with just-as-important results. The sacrifices of men in Zarb-e-Azb stand equal to those who were martyred in the Malakand, Dir, Buner, Bajaur, Mohmand, Kurram, Orakzai and South Waziristan, to name just a few.

Operation Zarb-e-Azb is the endpoint of a decade-long journey the nation has taken along side its forces on a path that is awash with the precious blood of beautiful sons. But like all military operations of the past this one too must be scrutinised and evaluated, and hard decisions taken about its future. This operation in North Waziristan was initially planned to close in two months at a cost of 25 billion rupees. How come it got stretched to two and half years with a 200 billion rupee bill without any closure in sight?

The new chief would do well to take an honest stock of what transpired in the last three years and learn, without malice and ill-will, what not to do now that he occupies this coveted throne of thorns and roses for a full tenure.


The writer is former executive editor of The News and a senior journalist with Geo TV.

https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/167980-Chief-donts
Answer to all his questions is you cannot undo, what has been done in decades, in just three years.
 
.
Conspiracy theories where? and you're ignoring my question has any civilians so far have done anything to make any 1 institution stronger and independent???

Sir, in your country's entire history, how much of it was the military rule, and how many governments were sent home without completing their terms? That is why your institutions didn't get developed. Someone perhaps wanted to keep the power to sacred few? Some real "patriots" may be? There is a history of it obviously. Mr. Sharif was the first Army Chief who left with respect and honor in 20 years. That's crazy, its 2 decades! India started heavy duty IT marketing around 2000 and now they are the top 3rd or 4th economy. That's what a country can get in 20 years if they followed the right policies. Here, 20 years were wasted to learn to "retire on-time"? You had Mr. Bush wanting to help Pakistan in 2003-2006. No use was made of his offers but the 18 F-16's were taken, when there could've been a $ 20 billion package of aid and investments for Pakistan back then. Life would be different today on that planet.

Because whenever something happens these civilians always call military to help them be it a forest fire, an oil tanker fire, a terrorist attack, a threat of terrorist attack, if we've to reply to modi in his language , drive against corruption, drive against gangs in Karachi, dismantling BLA/TTP terror networks building and ensuring the safety of CPEC, getting the people out of the areas before launching any operation and than help them in setting them back etc etc so where is the civilian gov in all this?

Sir, its the same in the US. The National Guards are called often for Floods, Riots, Wild Fires, etc, etc. So because you are doing a lot of work or the nation, that gives an Army Chief the publicity to go above and beyond any political marketing and over glorification? If you read the para above, you'll find the answer as to why I am asking for an answer on over glorification of the military. If the 2003 WOT help was used as a strategy, Pakistan would've been where it will be in 2020. Thanks

What he did was well within under his scope as COAS and constitution. However, he has given a very strong message to both civil and military leadership. Let the new blood flow in. Let the power go out of your hands even if you can hold it longer. His refusal to accept elevation to Field Marshal and extension. People die to get extension even if its for only few days. He refused complete one year, despite the fact that he was pressurised from all corners including public. He let the power go. It is about the time our politicians also let the power go from their hands when they can still hold it. They should stop reigning the country as a dynasty and take the country out of oligarchy.

Thank you Sir. This answer makes sense. However, my question was, all these things you wrote, are obviously good. I am not denying these facts, nor am I challenging the good outcome of these great strategies that Mr. Sharif used, such as new blood needs to come, retire on-time, etc.

My real question is, like the article suggests, why so much over glorification of the military? Like you said that he did the work in-scope for his role and I am sure he did more than that as he has great reputation. My question is really from an institutional standpoint as to why the military keeps her focus on being in the media so much. Thanks for your time in advance.
 
.
Sir, in your country's entire history, how much of it was the military rule, and how many governments were sent home without completing their terms? That is why your institutions didn't get developed. Someone perhaps wanted to keep the power to sacred few? Some real "patriots" may be? There is a history of it obviously. Mr. Sharif was the first Army Chief who left with respect and honor in 20 years. That's crazy, its 2 decades! India started heavy duty IT marketing around 2000 and now they are the top 3rd or 4th economy. That's what a country can get in 20 years if they followed the right policies. Here, 20 years were wasted to learn to "retire on-time"? You had Mr. Bush wanting to help Pakistan in 2003-2006. No use was made of his offers but the 18 F-16's were taken, when there could've been a $ 20 billion package of aid and investments for Pakistan back then. Life would be different today on that planet.



Sir, its the same in the US. The National Guards are called often for Floods, Riots, Wild Fires, etc, etc. So because you are doing a lot of work or the nation, that gives an Army Chief the publicity to go above and beyond any political marketing and over glorification? If you read the para above, you'll find the answer as to why I am asking for an answer on over glorification of the military. If the 2003 WOT help was used as a strategy, Pakistan would've been where it will be in 2020. Thanks
They had 10 years and what they did? NOTHING! and even before Musharraf it was PMLN and PPP taking turns 1 by 1 they didn't do anything even than and they're not gonna do anything to make any institution stronger and independent because than they wouldn't be able to do any corruption.
Stop comparing us with US again and again and i wonder why it's always Pak military who respond to modi and india's bullying and not our gov where is our FM? dude just stop defending the indefensible.
 
.
They had 10 years and what they did? NOTHING! and even before Musharraf it was PMLN and PPP taking turns 1 by 1 they didn't do anything even than and they're not gonna do anything to make any institution stronger and independent because than they wouldn't be able to do any corruption.
Stop comparing us with US again and again and i wonder why it's always Pak military who respond to modi and india's bullying and not our gov where is our FM? dude just stop defending the indefensible.

Sir, you still haven't addressed my question. On 10 years or 20 years, I don't disagree with the situation that the civilian leaders may or may not be corrupted. But it is also Pakistan. Everyone is corrupted, including the previous generals. I know it for a fact.

But that's everywhere too. So you wouldn't put the lack of growth of your country on those 50+ years of the military rule? Is that why the over glorification comes in to continue to ensure people trust the military more than their vote (military is just one institution under a democratic government)? I would love to understand this part. Thanks
 
.
The only reason why Pakistan is still on the map is exactly because of our military. Our spineless politicians have only looted the awam. Also, you Americans just got Trump and i wouldn't be surprised if you get a coup to overthrow that idiot before he carries on with his craziness.

Thank you sir. Now I understand why Pakistani military does over glorification of its work in the media when the work its doing, is within the scope of their oath and doesn't require media attention. Your answer was so great (not). Thanks
 
. .
The new army chief, General Qamar Javed Bajwa, has his work cut out. In the crucial years that lie ahead, his to-do list is long. But this list is also predictable. There is belligerent Delhi, scheming Kabul, badly-inclined Iran and the new face of terrorism, the Islamic State, drawing dispersed groups on our own land.

However, the less-imagined is his don’t list. This list, if prepared dispassionately, can bring greater clarity towards the tasks at hand. In preparing the don’t list, the COAS can learn from his predecessor, General (r) Raheel Sharif. And what he needs to learn essentially is how not to be like him in several key respects.

In the first instance, the new chief has to revive the army’s institutionalised decision and planning mechanism that has been severely damaged by General Raheel’s endless self-projection and self-centeredness. Many unfortunate consequences flowed from this policy. One, everything flowed towards the person of the COAS, and the rest of the institution was marginalised in what represented the entire army in the public sphere. Press releases and tweets in praise of the general’s activities substituted what ought to have been articulation of collective weight and wisdom of senior commanders on serious matters.

It is true that the army is not a parliament of equals: the one who sits at the head carries the maximum authority. But it is not a one-man rule institution either. It cannot be in the modern day and age. The army chief’s personal profile has to reflect the institution’s deliberated and studied policy. The new COAS can bring this side of his office back to life and put a reasonable ceiling on his personal media profile that touched insane heights under his predecessor.

The second consequence of General Raheel’s media-domination strategy was the tendency to commit to irrational goals that were militarily nebulous but did resonate with a public addicted to the mumbo jumbo of quick-fixes. So the big claims went something like this: terrorism has been eliminated; terrorists have been totally neutralised; parts of Fata are close to becoming Switzerland; by December all internally displaced families will be back in their homes; Pakistan’s borders have become totally secure. The list goes on and on.

This excessive embellishment of modest gains created exceptionally embarrassing situations. When in the middle of tall claims spectacular terrorist attacks happened there were no answers to be given only more bluster and more rhetoric. In this year alone, there have been close to 400 violations of Pakistan’s territorial perimeter from the eastern and north-western sides. Three years’ tally sits close 800. Now that is a scary figure but one that underscores the precarious nature of the country’s external environment and demands thoughtful deliberations.

Almost 80,000 families (some 800,000 people) still await return to their homes. This is a grim reality that rains on the pompous parade of achievements. A military commander’s claims must be borne out by facts. The new army chief must bring some realism to posturing on success and resist the temptation of playing to the gallery at the cost of professional credibility.

The third consequence of General Raheel’s media manoeuvre was to create a bubble of political expectations and let a vast group of jackals, hyenas and vultures constantly chase the potential hunt that was the sitting government. There can be many reasons to insist that the Nawaz government doesn’t deserve to be in power and early elections should be considered a serious possibility, but all paths to this change must go through the constitutional door.

On General Raheel’s watch there were any number of events that bordered on conspiracy to oust the sitting government through suspect methods, and his command was seen playing an underhand hand in this trouble by stoking the image of ‘change being imminent’. A countless number of times his name showed up on posters, in campaigns, as a third umpire in protests and in serious conversations across the diplomatic tables about causing the government to collapse and yet not once did he officially disassociate the army or himself from this amazing drama of hopes and dreams.

Generally, the army chief’s office, like all high offices, is exceptionally sensitive to needless controversies. That was exhibited recently when the head of a banned organisation tried to hurl an insane charge against one of the five candidates for the office of army chief but was slapped down so hard that he had to issue a rebuttal in less than 24 hours. This happened because he was told to take back his words and not play dirty politics with a name that could become the army chief. He obliged. He understood the consequences of not obliging.

That’s how neutrality can be ensured, and how effectively an important office can be protected from being used for petty gains by others. General Raheel did not do that. While he never crossed the constitutional line beyond which lies the murky world of coups, he allowed his name to float around scandalously close to the constitutionally alien territory.

There is reason to believe that a veritable army of crystal-ball gazers was nurtured. They vented their venom on screen as information for years, making a complete fool of this nation and pretending to represent the ‘Raheel thinking’. They operated with impunity. They cited ‘defence sources’ freely. They claimed they had been briefed. They had more ‘leaks’ from high security meetings than any hard-working journalist can dream of. They toured Fata. They sat in formal briefings and benefited from informal conversations where news agendas were set. They were never stopped as they marinated their declared goals against a sitting government in General Raheel’s deep praise.

This was accompanied by deliberate myth-building around Gen Raheel as the ‘greatest general’ to have ever walked the face of this country. Every step he took to go to his office was made to sound like a favour to the nation. Every ordinary visitor who complimented him out of courtesy was shown as an endorsement of his exceptional leadership. Every customary medal or an official sash given by the hosts was catapulted to the level of the Victoria Cross. Politicians repeated the hand-written script of greatness because sucking up to the chief of army staff is a long tradition. The media lapped up, or had to lap up, the official line. Others reinforced this image because this made them look ‘so patriotic’. So the folklore spread far and wide.

This was needless. Being the chief of the Pakistan Army is legendary enough. When a nuclear-armed force of under a million is at your disposal, you are very, very important already. You don’t need dubious everymen to become your brand ambassadors. Allowing them to play this role is to deface the office of the army chief. The new army chief needs to cut himself off from this sorry tradition of his name being debated freely in useless political conversations made by frivolous men and women.

And finally the new chief must bring military operations like Zarb-e-Azb out of the temple of mindless worship to the hard planning board of the military directorate (which is where an army chief has to be seen instead of on screen at PR functions). Operation Zarb-e-Azb is an important operation with results but is also a continuation of previous equally important operations with just-as-important results. The sacrifices of men in Zarb-e-Azb stand equal to those who were martyred in the Malakand, Dir, Buner, Bajaur, Mohmand, Kurram, Orakzai and South Waziristan, to name just a few.

Operation Zarb-e-Azb is the endpoint of a decade-long journey the nation has taken along side its forces on a path that is awash with the precious blood of beautiful sons. But like all military operations of the past this one too must be scrutinised and evaluated, and hard decisions taken about its future. This operation in North Waziristan was initially planned to close in two months at a cost of 25 billion rupees. How come it got stretched to two and half years with a 200 billion rupee bill without any closure in sight?

The new chief would do well to take an honest stock of what transpired in the last three years and learn, without malice and ill-will, what not to do now that he occupies this coveted throne of thorns and roses for a full tenure.


The writer is former executive editor of The News and a senior journalist with Geo TV.

https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/167980-Chief-donts

this guy is a piss-ant along with hamid mir. no one listens to him.
 
.
What do you want? You want me to tell you what you want to hear? :lol:

Sir, not really. I don't want to hear anything. I think I have enough understanding about the globe and Pakistan to know what's up. I wanted you to tell me as no one seems to openly discuss this topic. A society that keeps sacred goats inside of it and doesn't talk about issues openly, can never address them and mature. Thanks


Nice, so you finally got something for me. I'd take the first guy's explanation over Mr. Haq's musings as that's an older,, self-centered person who think he knows it all. His analytical skills are so off the reality that you almost want to cry reading his stuff. I've been through a few of this painful articles and was nauseated by the end. There is some respect you have internally if you write something about something. If you can't write properly and your facts and numbers are off the charts like your "friend told you about them", well you shouldn't be doing analyses then, let alone writing as you are far from doing justice to the topic.

Back on the topic, here is what I am trying to figure out and I appreciate you sticking with me till I find the answer. The military has ruled your country for like 55 years out of 70 of her total life. But these average poor people can't comprehend the fact that they are where they are because of that military rule? Had there been a civilian rule, you, as a country would have saved 2-3 decades. No military has even grown a country and I don't understand why so much over glorification? Just to make people listen to the media and continue to call the civilians "corrupt" so the people don't pay attention to the military? Thanks
 
.
Thank you Sir. This answer makes sense. However, my question was, all these things you wrote, are obviously good. I am not denying these facts, nor am I challenging the good outcome of these great strategies that Mr. Sharif used, such as new blood needs to come, retire on-time, etc.

My real question is, like the article suggests, why so much over glorification of the military? Like you said that he did the work in-scope for his role and I am sure he did more than that as he has great reputation. My question is really from an institutional standpoint as to why the military keeps her focus on being in the media so much. Thanks for your time in advance.

I think greatest achievement is repatriation of IDPs, Refugees and bringing back no go areas under government writ. As you do not live here and especially in Karachi. Karachi was ravished by criminal elements under the blessings of political parties. Those went through that ordeal, including me, can understand the importance of what PA did in Karachi. Without actually taking over the country he ruled through his character and professionalism. This what makes him so popular. He stepped in, remaining within his sphere of authority, when civilian governments failed to discharge their duty. I was a big fan of Musharaf for his economic handling, but I would say he is the most popular COAS PA has had so far. He reached where no other could reach and said where many could not even whisper.
 
.
This anti RS artical is picked by Indian.. Talat Hussain type of puppets are only following someone's lead who we call an enemy.
 
.
What shocks me more than anything is that even after a visible drop in terrorist activities,self proclaimed rationalists still question Op Zarb E Azb. Another interesting phenomenon i have seen is that these journalists without any proof assume too much about military and write articles blaming military, yet they never take a pain to write about visible corruption cases of politicians, the deliberate killing of protestors.
Military needs reform, they should not be interfering in politics yet the criticism of dysfunctional democracy because of politicians' own follies should be swept under the rug because so called democracy is nascent and it needs time.
 
.
Talat Hussain has Disappointed people who used to listen too his Views on National Issues... Unfortunate as may it sound but He is Biased, Writing Columns/Articles against Current Chief, & New Designated Chief Gen.Bajwa...
Yellow Journalism at its evil at its best...
He doesn't have the Guts or just gets blank about PMLN Govt Corruption, Nandi Pur Project Corruption, New Islamabad International Airport Corruption, External Debit crossing 80Billion yet he i think gets his due share *Wink Wink*....
These sort of Journalists who get paid from Min of Information Secret Fund should be taught a lesson by the state...
 
.
Had there been a civilian rule, you, as a country would have saved 2-3 decades. No military has even grown a country and I don't understand why so much over glorification? Just to make people listen to the media and continue to call the civilians "corrupt" so the people don't pay attention to the military? Thanks
Sigh even if i agree with you than these so called civilians in such a long time has done nothing compared to military on which people should praise them so it isn't military's fault if people love them and hate these incompetent corrupt thieves people do pay attention to military's mistakes in the past but it overshadows the damage these thieves have done to this country.
 
.

Latest posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom