How Islamicised is the Pakistan army?

[Xeric]

http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2008/04/23/how-islamicised-is-the-pakistan-army/

April 23rd, 2008
How Islamicised is the Pakistan army?

By: Myra MacDonald
Tags: Pakistan: Now or Never, army, Islamist, Pakistan, Siachen
While living in Delhi after 9/11, and in particular after India and Pakistan nearly went to war over an attack on the Indian parliament on December 13, 2001, one of the questions that cropped up frequently was about how much the Pakistan army had been permeated by hardline Islamists. In other words, how much sympathy did the army feel for al Qaeda and Taliban militants that then General Pervez Musharraf had pledged to fight?

Several years later, while researching a book on the Siachen war, I had occasion to travel with the Pakistan army and assess the Islamist question up close. My impression was that the Pakistan army was not driven by religious fanaticism. Yes, it exhorted its soldiers to embrace “shaheed”, or martyrdom, in the name of Allah. But it was otherwise remarkably similar to the Indian army. Both relied on a blend of nationalism and loyalty to their fellow men in the same unit; both found recruits in the mountains and rural villages who could be inculcated with a spirit of “ours not to reason why”; both counted on officers to lead from the front. Men did not go into battle dreaming of death. An officer who thinks only of killing himself is of little use to a professional army, which needs men who are above all sane, who can remain focused and objective, who know the difference between suicide and getting killed.

My Pakistan army minder on my trip to the Siachen war zone was clearly religious, respected prayer times, and did his best to explain to me the teachings of the Koran. But he probably expended more energy telling me off for smoking – particularly on the world’s highest battlefield where the air is so thin that it can be difficult to walk — much as my minder during a tour of Siachen on the Indian side had done.

So I thought I had settled the Islamist question — at least in my own mind — until August 2007, when more than 200 Pakistani soldiers in South Waziristan in Pakistan’s tribal areas were taken captive by Islamist militants without firing a single shot. During a visit to Delhi shortly afterwards, I discovered that people from the Indian army were as surprised as me — accustomed as they were to seeing their rivals on the Pakistan side at least make a show of fighting. Had the Islamists so permeated the Pakistan army that its soldiers had gone soft?

Pakistan army expert Brian Cloughley addresses this question in his book ”War, Coups and Terror”, a review of Pakistan since 1971 and due to be published next month. His conclusions make interesting reading.

While he recognises that the Pakistan army includes “some religious extremists among its officers and soldiers”, he says the promotions system overseen by President Pervez Musharraf made sure that officers were promoted on the basis of professional competence rather than religious devotion.

The rub came in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) next to the Afghanistan border, where religious ideologues had affected the morale and efficiency of the military. ”There is evidence that some soldiers have been so influenced by religiosity as to have doubts about their being regarded as Shaheed in the event of being killed in conflict with fellow Muslims who are held (by extremist clerics) to be engaged in fighting against infidels,” he writes. “This has resulted in incidents of refusal to take part in operations in the tribal areas, which indicate a serious malaise.”

Cloughley quotes the following from a source that he is unwilling to identify, but I think is worth reproducing here:

“Statements [by terrorists captured during an army operation] and [other sources] leads to one inevitable conclusion, that deep in their hearts . . . [some of the] troops have sympathies for AQ/Taliban who, in their perception are fighting a holy war against non-Muslims now occupying Afghanistan. This feeling has got further impetus and strength because of the US invasion and occupation of Iraq and a partisan approach towards the Palestinian issue. Print and electronic media, anti-US sentiments among the general public, bitter criticism by opposition leaders of our government’s policy regarding Afghanistan [and] support to the Coalition (US) forces in combating terrorism . . . and the anti-Islam propaganda by the west, have further reinforced the perception of the common man that Muslims all over the world are being victimised. These feelings have obviously . . . penetrated the rank and file of the Army despite our best efforts that whatever we are doing is in the overall best interests of the country. Having identified this weakness, we now need to apply all our command and leadership skills to educate our troops on the logic and necessity of what we are doing.”

Cloughley tries to take a positive view of this by saying that at least the problem was recognised by those in command and that action was being taken to address it. But he adds that Pashtuns — the ethnic group who live on both sides of the Pakistan-Afghanistan border and who make up about a fifth of the regular army – had sometimes shown reluctance to engage militants both out of a disinclination to kill fellow tribesmen and antipathy against fighting fellow Muslims. ”Another factor is the widely-held belief that the counter-insurgency war in FATA … is not being conducted on behalf of Pakistan but is waged at the behest of the United States.”

Cloughley also says that missile attacks blamed on U.S. Predator drones targeting al Qaeda leaders hiding in Pakistan’s tribal areas had further angered the army, since they also killed civilians. Yet at the same time, the army had found itself caught in the middle, facing itself a steep rise in suicide attacks directed against military targets, in retaliation for its operations on the border. Though I have seen only one advance chapter of Cloughley’s book, it makes an interesting read, highlighting as it does one aspect of the phenomenally complex challenges faced by Pakistan in battling Islamist militants.

 

[blain2]

This is similar to another article in Washington Post a while back. It just goes to show that just like the Pakistani nation, differing views exist in the Army.

The fact that this article was written in 2004 or so and as you can see Hamid Gul's prediction did not become reality, it goes to show you that the Pakistani Armed Forces continue to be very professional in their outlook. Religion is an important part of ethos but its tempered in reality of the Pakistani statehood.

Religion goes hand in hand as is the case in the Pakistani public life. I think outsiders simply do not understand the balance...its quite natural to most Pakistanis.


Pakistan struggles to put Army on moderate course

Daily Times Monitor

KAKUL: At the Pakistan Military Academy, the atmosphere fairly reeks of the British Raj: the cricket field, the polo ponies, the high-ceilinged mess hall with its turbaned waiters and white linen tablecloths, Washington Post reported on Sunday.

“We observe all the British traditions except the toast,” the paper quoted Lt Col Saadat Saeed Bhutta as saying proudly. “And we say, ‘Bismillah’” — In the name of God — at the start of every meal. .

The paper said the alcohol ban and the traditional Islamic blessing were not the only departure from British ways. The emphasis on religion is hard to miss. At the main entrance to the academy, an Arabic-lettered sign proclaims: “Victory Awaits Those Who Have Faith in God.” Fallen war heroes are honored in a “Martyrs’ Gallery.” The curriculum includes a six-month course in Islamic studies.

“Our basic route is Islam,” says Manan Abdul, 20, an army officer’s son from Punjab province who will soon graduate from the academy as a second lieutenant. “When we have to command, when we have to make decisions, for that we have a role model: the prophet, peace be upon him.”

At least in part, such expressions of faith are a legacy of a conscious strategy of “Islamisation” of the military that began in the late 1970s and has included active support for Muslim extremist groups, including the Taliban movement in Afghanistan. Now, as President Gen Pervez Musharraf seeks to steer his country on a more moderate course, rolling back that legacy has emerged as one of his most challenging — and most urgent — priorities.

In some respects, the Army would seem to be the least of Musharraf’s worries. Most of its senior commanders owe their jobs to the president, who has taken pains to ensure that the military’s upper ranks are filled with officers who share his moderate, pro-Western outlook. Even before Musharraf seized power in a 1999 coup, the Army had instituted procedures to sideline officers seen as overly sympathetic to radical groups.

The Army, so steeped in British tradition that its officers take their regimental silver on peacekeeping deployments abroad, remains a disciplined organization with a strong institutional interest in preserving its perks and privileges, according to active-duty and retired officers, Western and Pakistani military experts, and Western diplomats. Far more than an instrument of national defense, the army is Pakistan’s dominant political and economic power, with vast influence over important civilian institutions, such as universities, and extensive holdings in real estate and commercial industry.

Senior officers caution against reading too much into the Army’s embrace of religious symbols and slogans — including its 28-year-old motto, “Faith, Piety and Jihad in the Way of Allah” — which they describe as a “motivational tool” rather than a battle cry against the West. Two recent exhortations by Al Qaeda lieutenant Ayman Zawahiri for the Pakistani army to rise up against the “traitor” Musharraf had no apparent impact.

“It is not a secular army, but it is not a rabid jihadi Army,” said retired army Col Abdul Qayyum, a onetime friend and adviser to Gen Mohammed Zia ul-Haq, Pakistan’s military ruler from 1977 to 1988, who instituted the Islamisation program. “The basic ethos of the army is Muslim. In Zia ul-Haq’s time it got more explicit, open. This external display of it has receded, and I personally don’t see any possibility of a coup.”

But for all the emphasis on moderation, Musharraf and the army maintain strong ties with Muslim hard-liners, having helped to engineer a strong showing by an alliance of six hard-line Islamic parties in 2002 elections for parliament and provincial legislatures. Ever the tactician, Musharraf has permitted the hard-line parties to flourish, analysts say, to blunt any potential challenge to his rule from the secular opposition parties that still command the largest following in Pakistan.

There are indications, moreover, that Musharraf still faces a potential threat from extremists in the military angered by his close cooperation with the United States in the war on terrorism and his pursuit of a peaceful settlement of the conflict with India over Kashmir.

An inspector from the paramilitary Rangers, for example, has been charged in connection with a plot to assassinate Musharraf by bombing his convoy in Karachi in June 2002. Two air force technicians have been arrested in connection with the nearly successful suicide bombing against Musharraf’s limousine in Rawalpindi on Dec 25. And an army major faces court martial for allegedly providing shelter to Khalid Sheik Mohammed, a top Al Qaeda figure captured in Rawalpindi in March 2003; a colonel and two other officers were arrested for failing to report the major even though they allegedly knew of his activities. “Though this major was acting independently, it is not unfair to say that Al Qaeda had some penetration in the army,” said a senior Pakistani official who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Such warnings have fueled concerns abroad about the security of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal — a worry that was underscored by the recent proliferation scandal involving scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan.

“Something will snap at some point,” said Lt Gen. (r) Hamid Gul, who ran the Inter-Services Intelligence agency (ISI) from 1987 to 1989. “It’s like bending a green stick. The cracking point comes, but when is anyone’s guess.” Lt Gen (r) Talat Masood, a former secretary of defense production, does not go quite that far. Still, he said: “The question mark is essentially the middle ranks and lower ranks. It would take some time before you are able to convince the rank and file because they had a certain indoctrination and mind-set over the years, and it’s not easy to switch gears.”

Much of that indoctrination dates to the time of Zia, a religious conservative who sought to put an Islamic stamp on the military by enhancing the status of Muslim clerics assigned to combat units and introducing Islamic teachings at the military academy and at the army’s Command and Staff College. The sense of identification with a larger Islamic cause was further strengthened by the army’s role in funneling arms and ammunition — much of it supplied by the CIA — to Islamic guerrillas battling Soviet forces in Afghanistan in the 1980s.

After the Soviets withdrew in 1989, moreover, relations between the United States and Pakistan deteriorated. Washington imposed sanctions in a response to Pakistan’s nuclear program, cutting off military training programs in a move that fueled a sense of isolation and betrayal in the Army, according to retired Pakistani officers and Western diplomats. Most sanctions were lifted in the aftermath of the Sept 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in the United States, and the training programs have since resumed.

But the Army began to come to terms with Zia’s legacy in 1995, when a handful of uniformed zealots, led by a major general, were arrested for plotting a coup with the aim of imposing Islamic rule in Pakistan. As a direct result, officers from the rank of lieutenant colonel on up were “thoroughly screened” for signs of excessive Islamic zeal by field detachments from the army’s director general for military intelligence, according to retired US Army Col David Smith, who served two tours as a military attache in Pakistan, most recently from 2000 to 2003. Officers thought to have militant leanings “were not purged, but if they were in a sensitive position they were very quietly reassigned,” Smith said in an interview. “That system has remained in effect to this day.”

Smith recalled one particular illustration of the army’s alertness to signs of Islamic militancy. In December 2001, he said, he was invited to graduation ceremonies at the army staff college. He made a point of counting the number of graduates with beards — a common practice among foreign military attaches eager for any indicators of religious trends in the army.

After he had finished, Smith recalled, an ISI protocol officer approached him and asked, “How many beards did you count?”

Smith replied that he had counted 30 beards out of 225 graduates, down from 45 the year before. But the Pakistani took issue with his tally, insisting that only long beards — of which there were five — should be counted. “Those are the ones we worry about,” the ISI officer said.

The cross-currents of Islam and British influence converge visibly at the military academy, whose stone buildings, freshly painted curbs and manicured grounds are nestled in a spur of the Himalayas about 70 miles northwest of Islamabad. About 1,500 cadets are enrolled and spend two years studying for the equivalent of a bachelor’s degree before entering the officer corps.

At a gathering of upperclassmen called together for the benefit of a foreign guest, Bhutta, the lieutenant colonel and campus administrator, listened with a look of growing exasperation as several cadets stressed the centrality of Islam to the shaping of a Pakistani officer. “Yes, but what is the percentage of Islamic teachings?” Bhutta finally interrupted, eager to make the point that cadets devote much more of their classroom time to secular studies in areas such as political science, computers, and military history and tactics. “There was a visible leaning toward religion, but over time it has faded out,” said the academy commandant, Maj Gen Hamid Rab Nawaz, 52, a special forces veteran.

Campus life does not appear to be overly saturated with religion. Cadets spend free time surfing the Internet or — since the installation of cable television in lounge areas last year — watching movies such as “Bruce Almighty” on HBO. “A fantastic movie,” said Farhan Laghari, 21, a landowner’s son from Sindh province, of the comedy starring Jim Carrey as God.

 

[Keysersoze]

There is obviously something wrong there..............Anyone who thinks Bruce almighty is a "fantastic movie" is obviously unhinged

 

[blain2]

There is obviously something wrong there..............Anyone who thinks Bruce almighty is a "fantastic movie" is obviously unhinged

I agree...those in the Army may be unhinged in this manner more so than the so called "extremist" way.

 

[niaz]

Zia ul Haq and bigots such as Hamid Gul have left a legacy of Wahabi ism in all of Pakistan's polity. So much so that while at one time drinking and clubbing were a way to the promotion, in Zia's time offering regular prayers became a must for promotion in govt owned companies. I can quote two examples;

Once I was sitting with DG Oil in his office in Islamabad. At the Zuhar prayer time, he shut the door from inside. While we went on talking, I asked him why he did it. He pointed towards the prayer rug in one corner and said that he wanted every one to think that he was offering prayers so that he has no hurdles in his carrier.

At another time time I found that Imam of the mosque at the Attock Oil compound in Morgah was dismissed as the new General Manager himself led the prayers. Naturally all and sundry attended the mosque to avoid a black mark in their personal file.

There is nothing wrong in the above, only that this shows a kind of hypocracy and Islam being forced down people's throat; a practice followed only by the Wahabis.

I am therefore convinced that there is a lot of sympathy in the Army for the Islamic extremists. Ten years legacy's of extreme bigotry is not easy to get rid off.

 

[gnabi]

But the Army began to come to terms with Zia’s legacy in 1995, when a handful of uniformed zealots, led by a major general, were arrested for plotting a coup with the aim of imposing Islamic rule in Pakistan. As a direct result, officers from the rank of lieutenant colonel on up were “thoroughly screened” for signs of excessive Islamic zeal by field detachments from the army’s director general for military intelligence, according to retired US Army Col David Smith, who served two tours as a military attache in Pakistan, most recently from 2000 to 2003. Officers thought to have militant leanings “were not purged, but if they were in a sensitive position they were very quietly reassigned,” Smith said in an interview. “That system has remained in effect to this day.”

Smith recalled one particular illustration of the army’s alertness to signs of Islamic militancy. In December 2001, he said, he was invited to graduation ceremonies at the army staff college. He made a point of counting the number of graduates with beards — a common practice among foreign military attaches eager for any indicators of religious trends in the army.

After he had finished, Smith recalled, an ISI protocol officer approached him and asked, “How many beards did you count?”

Smith replied that he had counted 30 beards out of 225 graduates, down from 45 the year before. But the Pakistani took issue with his tally, insisting that only long beards — of which there were five — should be counted. “Those are the ones we worry about,” the ISI officer said.

[/B].

I don't think beard is a sign of extremism if so then all hippies would also be extremists We have thoroughly confused fundamentalism and extremism and now propogate that all muslims who pray five times and follow the teachings of Islam are extremists. I think the biggest extremist is the US who has so far killed tens of thousands of innocent muslims.

 

[mujahideen]

^^^^For a minute lets pretend that all those who have a beard, pray five times a day are extremists. But what does that make us? We make fun of them are we provoking them to attack us. Its makes us even bigger extremists, because we are the ones provoking them, to act the way they do. Just remember their is a reason why these people do the things they do and until we go after those things we can never eliminate terrorism.

 

[asaad-ul-islam]

Mujahideen is right, we shouldn't give anyone any excuse to attack us. Look guyz, we keep on talking about the west and islamophobia. Yet, we are the ones who are first in criticizing people who try to follow the religion.

Some of these extremists may attack us, but we always have a soft side for them. Our soldiers do have a big soft side for those people and I think these extremists are starting to realize that. It shows the extremists, who are really the better people. Let's just hope that things will be a lot more peaceful from now on, insha'Allah.

That's one reason why I urge people to lay off the secularism for a while. The people of this country have started to go more towards the religion, let's not divide people. We should make efforts to reconcile both our religious and secular brothers. Let's not split this country any more than it is right now.

 

[asaad-ul-islam]

Zia ul Haq and bigots such as Hamid Gul have left a legacy of Wahabi ism in all of Pakistan's polity. So much so that while at one time drinking and clubbing were a way to the promotion, in Zia's time offering regular prayers became a must for promotion in govt owned companies. I can quote two examples;

Once I was sitting with DG Oil in his office in Islamabad. At the Zuhar prayer time, he shut the door from inside. While we went on talking, I asked him why he did it. He pointed towards the prayer rug in one corner and said that he wanted every one to think that he was offering prayers so that he has no hurdles in his carrier.

At another time time I found that Imam of the mosque at the Attock Oil compound in Morgah was dismissed as the new General Manager himself led the prayers. Naturally all and sundry attended the mosque to avoid a black mark in their personal file.

There is nothing wrong in the above, only that this shows a kind of hypocracy and Islam being forced down people's throat; a practice followed only by the Wahabis.

I am therefore convinced that there is a lot of sympathy in the Army for the Islamic extremists. Ten years legacy's of extreme bigotry is not easy to get rid off.

Just a note, the Taliban are primarily Deobandi, unlike the wahabists of Al Qaeda. There is a difference between these groups, being that one is indigenous and the other consists mainly of foreigners.

One must not blame everyone for a few cases of fraud and corruption. We have to see past the "dirty evil mullah" images we cling on to.

Other than that, the Hudood laws were introduced in the 1973 constitution. it was the blasphemy laws that were introduced during Zia-ul-Haq's time. Let's not forget that the USSR was in Afghanistan to get access to a warm water port. Had Pakistan not supported the Mujahideen, Baluchistan would have been broken off from Pakistan.

 

[mujahideen]

The main question we must adress is why do these people commit these acts of terror. If you say they are crazy, then you are wrong. They are not crazy, they have revenge on their minds. Now this revenge is the issue we must address. We must always be willing to talk to them after all they are our brothers.

 

[EagleEyes]

There is obviously something wrong there..............Anyone who thinks Bruce almighty is a "fantastic movie" is obviously unhinged

Worst three hours of my life. We need to hook them up with Bourne Ultimatum and Bonds classics.

There is going to be a huge effect that way.

 

[gnabi]

Worst three hours of my life. We need to hook them up with Bourne Ultimatum and Bonds classics.

There is going to be a huge effect that way.

I say let's show them the series of movies called " loose Change". It is available on net and really impresses the way they have tried to prove 9/11 was a farce created by the US to be able to take control of Afghanistan.

 

[Xeric]

agreed upon dot com with all....
but one thing please leave beard n five times prayer out of the extremist catalogue...
now dont perpretatae this phenomenon tht anybody having the above mentioned things shud b considered as extrimist..(although thts wht happening)..
they r just better muslims....only in the eyes of Allah ..only if they r not hypocites n just showing off their actions...
the point to ponder is tht you wangt to keep beard n prayer u do it...u dnt want to do tht... then don't do it !!!! no one can force anyone to keep beard unless u r the parents...or may b not...but our only job is to correct ourselves..so tht others not keeping beard or parying regularly shoud b impressed n might change (mind i m not keeping a beard)
the only thing you r supposed to do is tht u can just ask or request or educate him to b a "guud" muslim...thts all....from there on he is free...he agrees with u ...OK.... if not dont call him an infidle....it is his n Allahs 'mamla'....