Excellent points, the politicians are as much to be blamed for the current crisis of political will in the country as the military.If you want representative government, then please tell me whether the PPP led government has asked the Army or PAF to take any action against the US drones? Please tell me if the PPP and PML-N told the Army to kill Davis or find some way to keep him in jail?
But pray explain the chain of events preceding the 2008 elections? Pakistan has been targeted via drones since 2004 and not 2008. Why wasn't PAF shooting them down then, instead of sharing AFBs with them? As of now, Pakistan Army has been given access to live video feeds from drones on strike missions, it's our sleuths on the ground in most instances which provide target information for the drones.
And in case you remember it well, the very first drone strike that resulted in a huge (80+) causality count in Bajaur area was actually owned by Pakistan Army (suggesting that it were their gunship helicopters which took out that particular madrassah). Only to be proven false later.
A reporter who had earlier pictured bits and pieces of a hellfire missile and sent it to the international media, after Pakistanis owned a drone strike, calling it their gun-ship attack on an Al-Qaeda member - was later picked up and killed.
Were it the politicians who asked the Pakistan Army to own drone strikes on behalf of the CIA?
Are you in any way suggesting that Pakistan Army has had absolutely no say in how Pakistan's role in war on terror is shaping up? Is it all because of the politicians?
When Asif Ali Zardari or Nawaz Sharif or any other politician for that matter met US authorities, under prevailing circumstances around R. Davis's arrest - the first news in Pakistan and/or on most defense related boards was that they have sold out Pakistan. So why cry foul when army is judged similarly? Isn't that what you ask people to do? Not judge them alone but along with rest of the culprits?
--------
As for the R. Davis issue, mind sharing how were the two other men, responsible for a hit and run, while trying to reach Davis able to escape Pakistan? I know it as well as any serious reader in here, that when it comes to intel ops, ECL is not the only list that can stop people from traveling out of Pakistan.
Or
How Fazal-e-Hayat (Fazlullah) escaped to Kunnar, Afghanistan - which shares no physical border with the valley of Swat, after being reported by ISPR to have been injured and surrounded for about 3/4 weeks?
Or
Why is it that the Army suddenly loses its voice (per certain opinion makers here) when it comes to issues such as WOT and Pakistan's role in it (giving an impression that it's entirely the politicians who run the show) but suddenly finds it again when Kerry Lugur aid bill suggests that flow of money will be controlled by civilians and that Army will give an undertaking to not to subvert the civilian government? Remember the ruckus around that?
Or
Would you like to revisit the arrest of Mullah Bradar in Karachi, and tell if the JSOC SpecOp team that pinpointed his exact location to ISI, was not the exact type of team operating out of Lahore, of which R. Davis was a part? Smoke and mirrors!
----------
People of Pakistan do not question Pakistan Army because it is an instrument of policy, but because it is - whether anyone likes it or not - very much the maker of that policy (and that process didn't begin yesterday but has been going on since 1958 'SEATO/CENTO', U2 flights out of Peshawar et al). You can choose not to see it, but that's entirely your prerogative.
And as for sharing the blame of burden, I quite agree. Mentioned the same in my post here.
Criticizing security policies of a certain institution is not automatically akin to withdrawing support from your troops, that's the argument which Republicans waged against the Democrats, before the last Presidential election. And it was as hollow in their case as it is here.
That said, both civilians and the armed forces personnel need to realize the fact that they belong to the same country. And not one party, neither the civvies nor the military folks are to 'question' each others patriotism, should differences exist b/w their points of view. Just because a person chooses to question or even criticize certain policies followed by the armed forces, it doesn't make him any less patriotic than any other Pakistani. The same argument goes for the civilians as well, which have more recently resorted to blaming the army for every evil that Pakistan confronts today.
Yes, politicians do actually invite the military to take part in politics, but this should also not be forgotten that the very people responsible for the making of the state of Pakistan were sidelined by the military back in 1958. The present lot of politicians (or the lack thereof) didn't come out of a vacuum. This phenomenon has very specific and certain reasons, which explain why we have such an incompetent lot of politicians ruling us today.
And in the same vein, no one - not even the army (except for the time of Gen. Zia) has ever stopped the civilians from paying attention to the well being of civil institutions, be it public services or simply good governance or even law and order. In that case, civilians are very much responsible for losing sight of what was supposed to be their ultimate duty towards the state of Pakistan.
But yes, as of today, the need is essential to stop considering security and foreign policies as means of enhancing clout of one single institution only. The armed forces of Pakistan need to increase civilian input when devising their policies (and not just intimidate them of their decisions). The legitimacy that they crave, can only be obtained via this way. The time to twist arms and doing what they thought was best, is fast running out.
P.S.
The idea that a soldier wages war at the borders while the rest of Pakistanis sit home and enjoy themselves is fallacious because the same soldier is paid for by the taxes of millions of Pakistanis in the country. The army does not generate funds on its own, it's run by the money of people of Pakistan. The points here is not to undermine the army, but to make clear that no Pakistani can gloat about his moral superiority over the other based on their nature of work.
That's the precise thought process, which leads to further divisions between the military and civil mindset - eventually leading to both sides opting to pick each other apart over every tiny issue.