What's new

How Pakistan's Army Weakens Pakistan

Status
Not open for further replies.

$elf

FULL MEMBER
Joined
Dec 6, 2013
Messages
429
Reaction score
-17
Country
India
Location
India
The alarming prospect of a coup in nuclear-armed Pakistan appears to be receding. But the country has been wounded by the military's handling of the crisis that threatened to topple Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif.

For more than two weeks, the generals allowed opposition politician Imran Khan and maverick cleric Tahir-ul-Qadri to whip up unruly protests in the center of Islamabad on suspiciously flimsy pretenses. Khan alleged massive rigging in last year’s elections, for which there is little to no evidence. Qadri demanded that Sharif’s government be removed for incompetence and corruption and replaced by unelected technocrats. Repeated assertions that the military was not taking sides -- “Army is apolitical,” read one vaguely Orwellian text messageearlier this week -- were barely credible. Protest leaders would hardly have remained so intransigent had they not sensed some sympathy from the brass.

Unlike army leaders in Thailand, who seized power outright after tolerating similarly disruptive street protests in Bangkok, Pakistan’s generals know that yet another coup in their country would prompt a cutoff of billions in aid and loans and spur widespread popular dissent. Instead, they appear content to have weakened Sharif, who had angered some army leaders by prosecuting former dictator Pervez Musharraf and reaching out to archenemy India. The chances that the prime minister will ever again defy the military’s wishes in foreign and defense policy now seem infinitesimal.

Yet this can only be bad for Pakistan. Rapprochement with India could potentially expand trade to $40 billion a year, from $3 billion today, and free up billions that both nations now spend on defense (one reason the generals dislike the idea).

As for Afghanistan, Sharif had expressed a willingness to work with any new government in Kabul. But the army is much more likely to play favorites there in a misguided attempt to counter Indian influence. Afghanistan’s current transition is already close to collapse; Pakistani meddling can only destabilize the country further.

Sharif’s bid to make peace with the Pakistani Taliban may have failed. But the army’s ensuing offensive in North Waziristan has been no panacea, either. While troops battle jihadists who challenge the Pakistani state, insurgents from more favored groups -- including the Haqqani network and the India-focused Lashkar-e-Taiba -- got plenty of warning to relocate. Continued support for such militants is riskier than ever: India’s new right-wing government is not likely to tolerate another Mumbai attack.

As the self-appointed guardians of Pakistan's sovereignty, the army thinks it only natural to play a central role in policy. Yet over the past half century, its interference has led to a series of losing wars, contributed to nuclear proliferation and the rise of global jihadism, tarnished Pakistan’s international reputation, undermined its internal governance, and helped cripple its economy.

Sharif may indeed be incompetent or corrupt; he has surrounded himself with cronies and appointed family members to several government posts. Until calling a joint session of parliament this week to shore up his support, he had barely bothered to attend the legislature.

But it's not the military’s job to hold the prime minister to account. A commission will now look into questions of vote-rigging. The courts are the place to address allegations of corruption. The parliamentary opposition and even members of Sharif’s own party should pressure his administration to govern more effectively. And voters, ultimately, are the ones to decide whether to throw the prime minister out.

Sharif's victory last year represented the first peaceful transfer of power between elected governments in Pakistan’s 67-year history. (Indonesia, in comparison, has witnessed three such transitions since the end of its military rule in 1998.) Given time, Pakistanis can improve their civilian governments. But first the army needs to get out of the way.


To contact the senior editor responsible for Bloomberg View's editorials: David Shipley at davidshipley@bloomberg.net.

How Pakistan's Army Weakens Pakistan - Bloomberg View
 
.
But it's not the military’s job to hold the prime minister to account. A commission will now look into questions of vote-rigging. The courts are the place to address allegations of corruption. The parliamentary opposition and even members of Sharif’s own party should pressure his administration to govern more effectively. And voters, ultimately, are the ones to decide whether to throw the prime minister out.

That is the theory. The actual practice in Pakistan is somewhat different. :D
 
. .
hahaa guys its time for Navy to rule all are sold out our leaders barking at each other like dogs in India poor people suffering from Rape ,poverty etc while they are only wasting money on weapons to open two-fronts China and Pakistan.

What we People can do all Indian and Pakistani's.
 
.
How Corrupt, Self-fish, Senile, Arrogant Political Dynasties are Weakening the Sub-Continent.

Just replace Military with the names of the ruling Dynasty.
 
. .
The alarming prospect of a coup in nuclear-armed Pakistan appears to be receding. But the country has been wounded by the military's handling of the crisis that threatened to topple Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif.

For more than two weeks, the generals allowed opposition politician Imran Khan and maverick cleric Tahir-ul-Qadri to whip up unruly protests in the center of Islamabad on suspiciously flimsy pretenses. Khan alleged massive rigging in last year’s elections, for which there is little to no evidence. Qadri demanded that Sharif’s government be removed for incompetence and corruption and replaced by unelected technocrats. Repeated assertions that the military was not taking sides -- “Army is apolitical,” read one vaguely Orwellian text messageearlier this week -- were barely credible. Protest leaders would hardly have remained so intransigent had they not sensed some sympathy from the brass.

Unlike army leaders in Thailand, who seized power outright after tolerating similarly disruptive street protests in Bangkok, Pakistan’s generals know that yet another coup in their country would prompt a cutoff of billions in aid and loans and spur widespread popular dissent. Instead, they appear content to have weakened Sharif, who had angered some army leaders by prosecuting former dictator Pervez Musharraf and reaching out to archenemy India. The chances that the prime minister will ever again defy the military’s wishes in foreign and defense policy now seem infinitesimal.

Yet this can only be bad for Pakistan. Rapprochement with India could potentially expand trade to $40 billion a year, from $3 billion today, and free up billions that both nations now spend on defense (one reason the generals dislike the idea).

As for Afghanistan, Sharif had expressed a willingness to work with any new government in Kabul. But the army is much more likely to play favorites there in a misguided attempt to counter Indian influence. Afghanistan’s current transition is already close to collapse; Pakistani meddling can only destabilize the country further.

Sharif’s bid to make peace with the Pakistani Taliban may have failed. But the army’s ensuing offensive in North Waziristan has been no panacea, either. While troops battle jihadists who challenge the Pakistani state, insurgents from more favored groups -- including the Haqqani network and the India-focused Lashkar-e-Taiba -- got plenty of warning to relocate. Continued support for such militants is riskier than ever: India’s new right-wing government is not likely to tolerate another Mumbai attack.

As the self-appointed guardians of Pakistan's sovereignty, the army thinks it only natural to play a central role in policy. Yet over the past half century, its interference has led to a series of losing wars, contributed to nuclear proliferation and the rise of global jihadism, tarnished Pakistan’s international reputation, undermined its internal governance, and helped cripple its economy.

Sharif may indeed be incompetent or corrupt; he has surrounded himself with cronies and appointed family members to several government posts. Until calling a joint session of parliament this week to shore up his support, he had barely bothered to attend the legislature.

But it's not the military’s job to hold the prime minister to account. A commission will now look into questions of vote-rigging. The courts are the place to address allegations of corruption. The parliamentary opposition and even members of Sharif’s own party should pressure his administration to govern more effectively. And voters, ultimately, are the ones to decide whether to throw the prime minister out.

Sharif's victory last year represented the first peaceful transfer of power between elected governments in Pakistan’s 67-year history. (Indonesia, in comparison, has witnessed three such transitions since the end of its military rule in 1998.) Given time, Pakistanis can improve their civilian governments. But first the army needs to get out of the way.


To contact the senior editor responsible for Bloomberg View's editorials: David Shipley at davidshipley@bloomberg.net.

How Pakistan's Army Weakens Pakistan - Bloomberg View

This article is stupid and misses a lot of important perspectives and points.

the country has been wounded by the military's handling of the crisis that threatened to topple Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif.

The army handled this crisis very well. What should have they done, shoot the protesters? They played a neutral role, controlled the protesters, kept important buildings safe and simultaneously put pressure on the government to get its stuff together and not use force against the protesters (which would have made the situation worse). That's what they were supposed to do, it was the best way to handle it.

The Army couldn't stay completely out of it, even if they wanted to, because the Government had invoked Article 245. It was their duty to do what they did, and they did it professionally and efficiently.

suspiciously flimsy pretenses. Khan alleged massive rigging in last year’s elections, for which there is little to no evidence. Qadri demanded that Sharif’s government be removed for incompetence and corruption and replaced by unelected technocrats

"Little to no evidence", government officials themselves admitted that thousands of votes could not be verified, there are plenty of videos and pictures of what happened inside the polling stations, a few people involved in it "confessed". There definitely is more than "little" evidence for that. It might not be enough to make the PM resign, but its not "little to no".

"for incompetence and corruption", really? That's all Qadri says?. No mention of the model town incident?? That was his main point in these marches, the deaths of 14 people. Incompetence and corruption is expected, badmashi and murder crosses the line. Not to mention the damage caused by PMLN's "Butt trilogy (Gullu, Pomi and Billu)", along with their misuse of the Police force and Mafia type behaviour.

“Army is apolitical,” read one vaguely Orwellian text messageearlier this week -- were barely credible. Protest leaders would hardly have remained so intransigent had they not sensed some sympathy from the brass.

Wow, ISPR is "orwellian" and "barely credible". What is to be expected, some sort of ceremony? They made themselves clear, even if their political agendas are different, they can't be called "barely credible". Maybe it wasn't believable but it certainly was credible.

As for Afghanistan, Sharif had expressed a willingness to work with any new government in Kabul. But the army is much more likely to play favorites there in a misguided attempt to counter Indian influence.

Yeah right, like Sharif's "expression of willingness" has anything to do with what he actually does. The attempt to counter Indian influence is not "misguided", there is no doubt that India has interests and influence in Afghanistan.

As the self-appointed guardians of Pakistan's sovereignty, the army thinks it only natural to play a central role in policy. Yet over the past half century, its interference has led to a series of losing wars, contributed to nuclear proliferation and the rise of global jihadism, tarnished Pakistan’s international reputation, undermined its internal governance, and helped cripple its economy.
This part is the funniest. "Self appointed guardians", What the hell is this supposed to mean?? The Army ARE SUPPOSED to be the guardians of sovereignty. Every army in the world is there to defend its country's sovereignty but its suddenly wrong if Pakistan's Army does that??

LOL, "its interference". It was mostly the political problems that undermined Pakistan Army's capability to fight wars, not the other way around. Army is SUPPOSED to be involved in Warfare.
"Nuclear proliferation", seriously?? That's the Army's fault too?
Anyone who has ever lived in Pakistan will know who really "undermined its internal governance" and "crippled its economy", the corrupt politicians like Zardari and Nawaz.

At the end of the day, this article does nothing except blame the Army for everything without any facts to base these allegations on. It makes it look like the Army never let poor, innocent politicians like Nawaz Sharif rule the country properly. Then it lies about the rigging allegations and Qadri's reason for protest. The army is behind everything, The Army killed 14 people in Model Town, the Army made Nawaz look corrupt by giving him money and assets, they were behind polio too.

I won't be surprised if the next article blames Army and ISI for too much rain, or too much heat.
 
. .
Status
Not open for further replies.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom