Being a patriotic and visionary doest make one a true leader.
A charismatic personality people religiously follow, who knows how his vision will be implicated in present and in foreseeable future for the benefit of a nation is a true leader.
A Person, a dictator, a Prime minister, a President, A COAS like Musharaf with immense powers would have done miracles for Pakistan. But unfortunately he was not able to deliver what Pakistan expected.
One must not do his or any Pakistani leader's comparison with his counterparts from Pakistan politics or military but with world leaders those were able set the benchmark for what the true leadership has to be .
Pakistan dont have leaders like Lal Bahadur Shastri:
Lal Bahadur Shastri - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
While the conflict between the armed forces of the two countries has come to an end, the more important thing for the United Nations and all those who stand for peace is to bring to an end the deeper conflict... How can this be brought about? In our view, the only answer lies in peaceful coexistence. India has stood for the principle of coexistence and championed it all over the world. Peaceful coexistence is possible among nations no matter how deep the differences between them, how far apart they are in their political and economic systems, no matter how intense the issues that divide them.
Gen. Musharaf could have learnt from above quote before doing ''Bismillah" in Kargil.
There comes a time in the life of every nation when it stands at the cross-roads of history and must choose which way to go. But for us there need be no difficulty or hesitation, no looking to right or left. Our way is straight and clear – the building up of a socialist democracy at home with freedom and prosperity for all, and the maintenance of world peace and friendship with all nations.
I still remember his famous TV address to the nation before joining hands with USA for WOT when he expressed only a qualified backing for the U.S. position. Musharraf referred to the dilemma Pakistan was facing as it had to choose between “two adversities”—confrontation or cooperation with the United States (and the West). He concluded that in such a case Islamic law requires that one choose the lesser adversity (in this instance, cooperation with Washington). He compared his move to the temporary cease-fires that Muslim leaders had signed with
nonbelievers in the early stages of Muslim history to provide the Muslims with an opportunity to gain strength and expand their influence. It is more likely that Musharraf was applying the lessons of Muslim history and teachings to make an argument in favor of a short-term accommodation with the powerful non-believers of the day, the Americans.
He could have lead the nation like a leader rather using such references cause neither he was an Islamic historian nor he was a cleric to use historic Islamic reference. His blur vision and decision making dilemmas kept the nation in dark who plunged into WOT without knowing whether they are pro or against joining hands with USA.
WOT could have finished today without taking much toll if Pakistan was lead by him with true situational awareness and purpose which he was never able to do.
Regards.
