Why are we accusing the COAS?

[khansaheeb]

Indian attack would be accompanied with some more US love letters. They work in conjunction. Can you please explain that Hafiz Saeed was wanted by whom?? And just coincidentally he is sentenced to 31 years of prison just now . Before that for decades we had been listening that there aren't any credible proves against him and was regularly being acquitted of any charges from terrorism courts. And suddenly having a change of heart against him!

Dollars change minds.

Pakistan’s political crisis, briefly explained

An end to Pakistan’s constitutional crisis. But a political crisis endures.

www.vox.com

Pakistan’s political crisis, briefly explained​

An end to Pakistan’s constitutional crisis. But a political crisis endures.
By Jonathan Guyer@mideastXmidwestjonathan.guyer@vox.com Apr 9, 2022, 7:00am EDT

Share this story​

• Share this on Facebook (opens in new window)
• Share this on Twitter (opens in new window)
• SHAREAll sharing options

Supporters of the ruling Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (Movement for Justice) party rally in Islamabad on April 2, as Prime Minister Imran Khan called on his supporters to take to the streets ahead of a parliamentary no-confidence vote that could see him thrown out of office. Aamir Qureshi/AFP via Getty Images
Editor’s note, April 10: Sunday, Imran Khan received a vote of no confidence from the Pakistani parliament, losing his position as prime minister. A vote on a new prime minister is expected as soon as Monday.
One of Pakistan’s twin crises was resolved this week. The other one, not so much.
On Thursday, the country’s supreme court delivered a historic ruling that resolved a constitutional crisis that took shape last week. The court rebuked Prime Minister Imran Khan, a self-fashioned populist leader and former cricket star who is more celebrity than statesman. Khan, the court ruled, had acted unconstitutionally when he dissolved Pakistan’s Parliament last week in order to avoid losing power through a no-confidence vote.
It was a surprising and reassuring decision, experts in the country’s politics said, given the supreme court’s checkered record as a sometime political ally of Khan. On Thursday, the court sided with the rule of law.
But the underlying political crisis that led to the court’s landmark order endures.
Khan outlandishly blamed the opposition parties’ efforts to oust him on a US-driven foreign conspiracy. Now, the Parliament has been restored and will continue with its no-confidence vote against Khan’s premiership Saturday, likely leading to his ouster and extraordinary elections later this year. Khan, for his part, said that he would “fight” back.
The broader political crisis, however, can be traced to the 2018 election that brought Khan to power. Traditionally, the military is the most significant institution in Pakistan, and it has often intervened to overthrow elected leaders that got in its way. Khan’s rise is inextricable from military influence over politics, and the incumbent prime minister accused the military of a soft coup for manipulating the election in Khan’s favor.
It was a “very controversial election,” says Asfandyar Mir, a researcher at the United States Institute of Peace. “There was a major question over the legitimacy of that electoral exercise and the government that Khan formed could just never escape the shadow of the controversy surrounding that election,” Mir explained.

Pakistan’s cricketer-turned-politician Imran Khan speaks after casting his vote at a polling station during the general election in Islamabad on July 25, 2018. Aamir Qureshi/AFP via Getty Images
More recently, the relationship between the military and Khan has worsened, and that gave the political opposition an opening to act against him. Though it’s not known what role the military played in the supreme court’s ruling, experts note that the harshness of the court’s order suggests the military’s buy-in. “This is part of a larger history of instability in Pakistan in which prime ministers are ousted from power, because they lose the support of Pakistan’s military,” Madiha Afzal, foreign policy fellow at the Brookings Institution, told Vox.

But “even if the court was influenced by the military, it took the right decision,” she says.

Khan’s position weakened domestically​

The political and economic situation set the stage for a challenge to Khan.
After running on a campaign that promised less corruption and more economic opportunity for the poor, Khan has failed to deliver. Inflation is climbing, unemployment is soaring, and a billion-dollar program from the International Monetary Fund has not helped stabilize matters. An international investigation into offshore money from last year, known as the Pandora Papers, showed that Khan’s inner circle had moved money abroad to avoid taxes, in contradiction with Khan’s populist rhetoric.
Khan presided over an anti-corruption witch hunt targeting opposition parties. Indeed, the opposition parties, many of them composed of dynastic leadership and families with old money, are corrupt, and their attempt to oust Khan can be seen as a move to evade further scrutiny, Mir said.
Still, that anti-corruption effort brought the government bureaucracy to a halt. And it’s part of Khan’s broader strongman-style approach to governing that has been ineffective.
Since his start in politics, Khan has depended on the courts. Yasser Kureshi, a researcher in constitutional law at the University of Oxford, says Khan has built his political standing on backing the judiciary. “Imran Khan’s political platform has been built around an anti-corruption populism, where he charges the political class for being corrupt, and in the last 15 years the supreme court has been on a spree of jurisprudence targeting the political corruption of Pakistan's traditional parties,” he explains. “Khan has been the biggest supporter of this jurisprudence as it has validated and legitimized his politics.”
Now, the court appears to have turned against him at a time when the military has also lost faith in Khan. “With Imran Khan, I think that the problem for him is that right now, he has no institutional solutions that he can really turn to,” says Kureshi.

Khan’s relationship with the US has also cooled​

Pakistan is a nuclear-armed country with a population of 220 million; it has built the sixth-largest military in the world, and has clout as a leader in the Islamic world. A longtime participant in the US war on terrorism, Pakistan has also been a conflicted partner, criticized for at times abetting the Taliban.
Khan was elected in 2018, and Mir says that, two years in, the military’s relationship to him began to cool. Khan feuded with the army chief over foreign policy issues, and the military saw Khan’s poor governance as a liability. Last year, Khan’s delays in signing off on a new intelligence chief prompted speculation of more divides between the two.
President Joe Biden did not phone Khan in his initial days in office, though he did call the leader of India, Pakistan’s chief rival. “The Biden administration’s cold shoulder to Imran Khan rubbed him the wrong way,” said Afzal. “Pakistan has just fallen off a little bit of the radar in terms of high-level engagement.”
Khan’s public messaging as a strongman has partially been responsible for agitating the relationship with the US — and by extension, his relationship with the Pakistani military, which wants to be closer to the US.
Most recently, that chill was expressed by Khan’s decision to stay neutral in Russia’s war on Ukraine; Khan visited Moscow just in advance of Russia’s invasion.
And, now, he’s turned to accusations of conspiracy: that the opposition’s stand against him is manufactured by the US. The origins of Khan’s incendiary claims appear to be a diplomatic cable that Pakistan’s ambassador to Washington sent home last month after a meeting with senior State Department official Donald Lu. Whatever criticisms Lu may have conveyed about Pakistan’s foreign policy, Khan’s interpretation of the memo has clearly been blown out of proportion. “When it comes to those allegations, there is no truth to them,” State Department spokesperson Ned Price said last week.
It’s an open question whether his argument will resonate among a Pakistani populace who is suspicious of the United States. One group it’s likely not resonating with: Pakistan’s powerful military.

Pakistan’s Prime Minister Imran Khan (third from left) and President Arif Alvi (fourth from left) watch Pakistan’s fighter jets perform during a parade in Islamabad on March 23. Ghulam Rasool/AFP via Getty Images
Khan is “critical of the United States to a point that makes the military uncomfortable,” said Shamila Chaudhary, an expert at the New America think tank. “The way he’s talking about the United States is preventing the US relationship with Pakistan from being repaired, and it needs to be repaired.”
Meanwhile, the Biden administration’s focus in Asia has been on great-power competition with China and two national security crises (the Afghanistan withdrawal and Russia’s Ukraine invasion). The sloppy withdrawal of US forces from Afghanistan furthered the disconnect between Washington and Islamabad, according to Chaudhary, and further upset Pakistan’s government.

Robin Raphel, a former ambassador who served as a senior South Asia official in the State Department from 1993 to 1997, described Biden’s outlook to Pakistan as a “non-approach approach.”
“I’m a diplomat, and, I believe you get more with honey than vinegar,” she said. “It would have been more than worth it for the president to take five minutes to call Imran Khan.”
The US did send its top State Department official for human rights, Uzra Zeya, to the Organization of Islamic Countries summit in Pakistan last month. Zeya also met with the country’s foreign minister and senior officials, as the two countries celebrated the 75th anniversary of diplomatic relations.
But there hasn’t been more than that in terms of a positive message for the US-Pakistan relationship in light of the recent political and constitutional crises in the country. Price’s recent comments on the situation were brief: “We support Pakistan’s constitutional process and the rule of law.”

What happens next​

Once the Parliament completes its no-confidence vote, which may happen as soon as today, it will dissolve the government. The country’s electoral commission will then oversee a caretaker government that will likely be headed by the leader of the opposition, Shehbaz Sharif. (Sharif is the brother of Nawaz Sharif, a former prime minister himself, who is currently living in exile in the UK as he faces accusations of corruption.) And, in that forthcoming vote, Khan will most probably lose.
But even the specifics of those elections are contentious. Khan had asked the electoral commission to set a date within the next 90 days; opposition politicians told NPR that reforms are needed before the next vote, otherwise they say the military will “rig” the next elections.
Long-term, things are even less clear. Among civil society leaders in Pakistan, there is agreement that the supreme court’s ruling is good for constitutionalism. But it may also be a vehicle for further expansion of the judiciary’s ability to intervene in politics.
Kureshi, an expert on the courts of Pakistan and how they have increasingly become the arbiter of politics in the country, says the bigger takeaways won’t be fully understood until the court releases the full text of its ruling in the next month or so. That detailed order may set other legal precedents and even cast the opposition in a bad light.
After the immediate euphoria of keeping Khan’s audacious unconstitutional maneuver in check, that judgment may say a lot about how the court sees itself, especially its supervisory role over the parliament and prime minister.
“The elected institutions are deeply constrained by the tutelage of overly empowered unelected institutions, whether it is the military, historically, or the judiciary more recently,” said Kureshi. “Judgments like this give them an opportunity to further affirm and expand that role.”

 

[SecularNationalist]

Because after what happened between 11pm-12 am on the voting day there should be no doubt left.

 

[blain2]

Karachi did it what a crowd......................

That is some street power!

 

[The Terminator]

Dollars change minds.

Pakistan’s political crisis, briefly explained

An end to Pakistan’s constitutional crisis. But a political crisis endures.

www.vox.com

Pakistan’s political crisis, briefly explained​

An end to Pakistan’s constitutional crisis. But a political crisis endures.
By Jonathan Guyer@mideastXmidwestjonathan.guyer@vox.com Apr 9, 2022, 7:00am EDT

Share this story​

• Share this on Facebook (opens in new window)
• Share this on Twitter (opens in new window)
• SHAREAll sharing options

Supporters of the ruling Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (Movement for Justice) party rally in Islamabad on April 2, as Prime Minister Imran Khan called on his supporters to take to the streets ahead of a parliamentary no-confidence vote that could see him thrown out of office. Aamir Qureshi/AFP via Getty Images
Editor’s note, April 10: Sunday, Imran Khan received a vote of no confidence from the Pakistani parliament, losing his position as prime minister. A vote on a new prime minister is expected as soon as Monday.
One of Pakistan’s twin crises was resolved this week. The other one, not so much.
On Thursday, the country’s supreme court delivered a historic ruling that resolved a constitutional crisis that took shape last week. The court rebuked Prime Minister Imran Khan, a self-fashioned populist leader and former cricket star who is more celebrity than statesman. Khan, the court ruled, had acted unconstitutionally when he dissolved Pakistan’s Parliament last week in order to avoid losing power through a no-confidence vote.
It was a surprising and reassuring decision, experts in the country’s politics said, given the supreme court’s checkered record as a sometime political ally of Khan. On Thursday, the court sided with the rule of law.
But the underlying political crisis that led to the court’s landmark order endures.
Khan outlandishly blamed the opposition parties’ efforts to oust him on a US-driven foreign conspiracy. Now, the Parliament has been restored and will continue with its no-confidence vote against Khan’s premiership Saturday, likely leading to his ouster and extraordinary elections later this year. Khan, for his part, said that he would “fight” back.
The broader political crisis, however, can be traced to the 2018 election that brought Khan to power. Traditionally, the military is the most significant institution in Pakistan, and it has often intervened to overthrow elected leaders that got in its way. Khan’s rise is inextricable from military influence over politics, and the incumbent prime minister accused the military of a soft coup for manipulating the election in Khan’s favor.
It was a “very controversial election,” says Asfandyar Mir, a researcher at the United States Institute of Peace. “There was a major question over the legitimacy of that electoral exercise and the government that Khan formed could just never escape the shadow of the controversy surrounding that election,” Mir explained.

Pakistan’s cricketer-turned-politician Imran Khan speaks after casting his vote at a polling station during the general election in Islamabad on July 25, 2018. Aamir Qureshi/AFP via Getty Images
More recently, the relationship between the military and Khan has worsened, and that gave the political opposition an opening to act against him. Though it’s not known what role the military played in the supreme court’s ruling, experts note that the harshness of the court’s order suggests the military’s buy-in. “This is part of a larger history of instability in Pakistan in which prime ministers are ousted from power, because they lose the support of Pakistan’s military,” Madiha Afzal, foreign policy fellow at the Brookings Institution, told Vox.

But “even if the court was influenced by the military, it took the right decision,” she says.

Khan’s position weakened domestically​

The political and economic situation set the stage for a challenge to Khan.
After running on a campaign that promised less corruption and more economic opportunity for the poor, Khan has failed to deliver. Inflation is climbing, unemployment is soaring, and a billion-dollar program from the International Monetary Fund has not helped stabilize matters. An international investigation into offshore money from last year, known as the Pandora Papers, showed that Khan’s inner circle had moved money abroad to avoid taxes, in contradiction with Khan’s populist rhetoric.
Khan presided over an anti-corruption witch hunt targeting opposition parties. Indeed, the opposition parties, many of them composed of dynastic leadership and families with old money, are corrupt, and their attempt to oust Khan can be seen as a move to evade further scrutiny, Mir said.
Still, that anti-corruption effort brought the government bureaucracy to a halt. And it’s part of Khan’s broader strongman-style approach to governing that has been ineffective.
Since his start in politics, Khan has depended on the courts. Yasser Kureshi, a researcher in constitutional law at the University of Oxford, says Khan has built his political standing on backing the judiciary. “Imran Khan’s political platform has been built around an anti-corruption populism, where he charges the political class for being corrupt, and in the last 15 years the supreme court has been on a spree of jurisprudence targeting the political corruption of Pakistan's traditional parties,” he explains. “Khan has been the biggest supporter of this jurisprudence as it has validated and legitimized his politics.”
Now, the court appears to have turned against him at a time when the military has also lost faith in Khan. “With Imran Khan, I think that the problem for him is that right now, he has no institutional solutions that he can really turn to,” says Kureshi.

Khan’s relationship with the US has also cooled​

Pakistan is a nuclear-armed country with a population of 220 million; it has built the sixth-largest military in the world, and has clout as a leader in the Islamic world. A longtime participant in the US war on terrorism, Pakistan has also been a conflicted partner, criticized for at times abetting the Taliban.
Khan was elected in 2018, and Mir says that, two years in, the military’s relationship to him began to cool. Khan feuded with the army chief over foreign policy issues, and the military saw Khan’s poor governance as a liability. Last year, Khan’s delays in signing off on a new intelligence chief prompted speculation of more divides between the two.
President Joe Biden did not phone Khan in his initial days in office, though he did call the leader of India, Pakistan’s chief rival. “The Biden administration’s cold shoulder to Imran Khan rubbed him the wrong way,” said Afzal. “Pakistan has just fallen off a little bit of the radar in terms of high-level engagement.”
Khan’s public messaging as a strongman has partially been responsible for agitating the relationship with the US — and by extension, his relationship with the Pakistani military, which wants to be closer to the US.
Most recently, that chill was expressed by Khan’s decision to stay neutral in Russia’s war on Ukraine; Khan visited Moscow just in advance of Russia’s invasion.
And, now, he’s turned to accusations of conspiracy: that the opposition’s stand against him is manufactured by the US. The origins of Khan’s incendiary claims appear to be a diplomatic cable that Pakistan’s ambassador to Washington sent home last month after a meeting with senior State Department official Donald Lu. Whatever criticisms Lu may have conveyed about Pakistan’s foreign policy, Khan’s interpretation of the memo has clearly been blown out of proportion. “When it comes to those allegations, there is no truth to them,” State Department spokesperson Ned Price said last week.
It’s an open question whether his argument will resonate among a Pakistani populace who is suspicious of the United States. One group it’s likely not resonating with: Pakistan’s powerful military.

Pakistan’s Prime Minister Imran Khan (third from left) and President Arif Alvi (fourth from left) watch Pakistan’s fighter jets perform during a parade in Islamabad on March 23. Ghulam Rasool/AFP via Getty Images
Khan is “critical of the United States to a point that makes the military uncomfortable,” said Shamila Chaudhary, an expert at the New America think tank. “The way he’s talking about the United States is preventing the US relationship with Pakistan from being repaired, and it needs to be repaired.”
Meanwhile, the Biden administration’s focus in Asia has been on great-power competition with China and two national security crises (the Afghanistan withdrawal and Russia’s Ukraine invasion). The sloppy withdrawal of US forces from Afghanistan furthered the disconnect between Washington and Islamabad, according to Chaudhary, and further upset Pakistan’s government.

Robin Raphel, a former ambassador who served as a senior South Asia official in the State Department from 1993 to 1997, described Biden’s outlook to Pakistan as a “non-approach approach.”
“I’m a diplomat, and, I believe you get more with honey than vinegar,” she said. “It would have been more than worth it for the president to take five minutes to call Imran Khan.”
The US did send its top State Department official for human rights, Uzra Zeya, to the Organization of Islamic Countries summit in Pakistan last month. Zeya also met with the country’s foreign minister and senior officials, as the two countries celebrated the 75th anniversary of diplomatic relations.
But there hasn’t been more than that in terms of a positive message for the US-Pakistan relationship in light of the recent political and constitutional crises in the country. Price’s recent comments on the situation were brief: “We support Pakistan’s constitutional process and the rule of law.”

What happens next​

Once the Parliament completes its no-confidence vote, which may happen as soon as today, it will dissolve the government. The country’s electoral commission will then oversee a caretaker government that will likely be headed by the leader of the opposition, Shehbaz Sharif. (Sharif is the brother of Nawaz Sharif, a former prime minister himself, who is currently living in exile in the UK as he faces accusations of corruption.) And, in that forthcoming vote, Khan will most probably lose.
But even the specifics of those elections are contentious. Khan had asked the electoral commission to set a date within the next 90 days; opposition politicians told NPR that reforms are needed before the next vote, otherwise they say the military will “rig” the next elections.
Long-term, things are even less clear. Among civil society leaders in Pakistan, there is agreement that the supreme court’s ruling is good for constitutionalism. But it may also be a vehicle for further expansion of the judiciary’s ability to intervene in politics.
Kureshi, an expert on the courts of Pakistan and how they have increasingly become the arbiter of politics in the country, says the bigger takeaways won’t be fully understood until the court releases the full text of its ruling in the next month or so. That detailed order may set other legal precedents and even cast the opposition in a bad light.
After the immediate euphoria of keeping Khan’s audacious unconstitutional maneuver in check, that judgment may say a lot about how the court sees itself, especially its supervisory role over the parliament and prime minister.
“The elected institutions are deeply constrained by the tutelage of overly empowered unelected institutions, whether it is the military, historically, or the judiciary more recently,” said Kureshi. “Judgments like this give them an opportunity to further affirm and expand that role.”

Why sharing a huge news report from some western source. Just come to the main point.
$$$ matters yes. Almost anyone can be bought in Pakistan from $$$ either wearing a simple attire or some uniforms don't make any difference whatsoever.

 

[LeGenD]

US spent over 6 trillions n 20 years to capture Afghanistan n failed while in Pak only 30-40 milion were spent n less than 2-3 days a regime was changed. Even Malik Riaz could do that or Zardari alone without any foreign backing. While we r blaming one guy here, it was actually a sad demise of our moral values at the top. We didnt reach here in few days or weeks, not one man's actions or lack of that lead us to this situation. We got independence in 1947 n just one year later we lost Quaid n then Liaquat Ali Khan is martyred and we go back to 13 Aug 1947 situation. In 2022 we realized we r slaves but we were slaves for past so many decades. I still dont know who exactly was the root cause of all this and bad things have yet to come for Pakistan. I dont want to see a repeat of Libya Iraq etc but we r very much on that same route. I dont see any other strategic target which US wants to conquer in this world n it was Pakistan's turn sooner or later, Khan just accelerated the timeline by declaring change in foreign policy in a public procession n on TV interviews. If he had some decent Media handling training we would have been in a very different spot today.
If i want to view pessimistically there is no silver-lining from all what has happened but lets have faith in Allah. Lets be optimistic, lets not blame anyone person, its a collective failure n we all have to share the outcome.

Correction: US spent over 1 Trillion USD for COIN to dismantle Al-Qaeda Network and reform Afghanistan but found it impractical to reform this country due to prevalence of corruption and infighting and LEFT it to its devices eventually. Afghanistan is back to Square One with its people starving and continues to host TTP who continue to kill Pakistani. PTI-led GOP desired talks with TTP on the other hand, to no benefit. What is the fuss now?

- - -

Americans threatened India as well:

Ukraine war: India to face significant cost if aligned with Russia, US warns

New Delhi’s reaction to Moscow’s invasion is complicating its relationship with Washington, which regards it as a partner in countering China’s influence in Asia.

www.scmp.com

Americans are sensitive about developments in Ukraine and how other countries are dealing with Russia in relation.

- - -

Pakistan have a lengthy history of political instability and it shows in current times as well. PDM emerged in response to anti-corruption drive with FIA and NAB investigating cases of corruption involving Asif Ali Zardari and Shahbaz Sharif among others.

Asif Ali Zardari is in PANIC MODE due to investigations of NAB - they have uncovered his undisclosed investments in USA. He instructed Bilawal to visit USA for counter-homework in this regard.

Shahbaz Sharif is in PANIC MODE due to investigations of FIA.

Perhaps PDM promised something to Americans? I am not sure about this.

PTI-led GOP was lacking in homework for Biden administration on the other hand. Not only this but it had internal problems which surfaced when political atmosphere heated.

I understand the frustration of PTI voters in view of the collapse of PTI-led GOP (I am one myself) but I am not sure how waves of Anti-Americanism and army-bashing will help Pakistan. Army-bashing have reached new heights in fact.

Pakistan Army is not an extension of any political party but independent organization which strives to protect Pakistan and safeguard its interests in view of internal and external challenges. The organization have to swallow a bitter pill sometimes.

Pakistan must strive for BALANCED Foreign Policy or it will continue to face problems.

Pakistan also needs to FIX its judiciary system if it is to curb corruption. This is foremost challenge.

 

[khansaheeb]

Why sharing a huge news report from some western source. Just come to the main point.
$$$ matters yes. Almost anyone can be bought in Pakistan from $$$ either wearing a simple attire or some uniforms don't make any difference whatsoever.

I put it in because it covered the key question -"Why IK and PA relationship fell apart". What was IK's key action that PA loathed and how they manipulated his exit? The moment he landed in Moscow I think most people knew that was the end of IK as a PM. What would be interesting to know is did IK confer with PA about his trip or did he just pack his bags and left for Moscow to spite President Biden? Or was it the gang of 3 who spooked the army?

 

[senses]

And you know this how, were you there? First that anyone here has heard that "Bajwa" said no.

I understand the need to build a narrative to show Bajwa as a coward, worthy of scorn but let's have the courage to speak the truth and not peddle propaganda. What is your source that the CoAS of Pakistan was the only man in the cabinet to not suggest a response to India?

This is the same chief whose architecture was implemented by Gen Rahil Sharif to prosecute the FATA operations successfully which brought peace to Pakistan. You can blame him for the current fiasco if you'd like, but refrain from outright lies.

No Pakistani worth his salt will sit quietly in the face of Indian aggression. It was the military leadership that told PMIK that we will respond which led the PM to make the speech where he said 'hum sochain gay nahi...."

Let the people come out on the streets and stand their ground, no issues, but don't build this false narrative about our very own army.

I know this because PMIK said this in an interview about mixed opinion and specifically saying Bajwa wanted to wait and see/asses the damage first. Go easy on your Bajwa fan boy.

I think it was with Kamran Khan

 

[Tariq Habib Afridi]

I know exactly what you mean. But (the fight between those two) should not have resulted in this debacle. Though that did factor into this situation, I think there is much more that came together for this to happen.

this is what i also thought that there is much more than that which we will never know for sure. However if this is the case then why only Bajwa is being bashed why not the other too? he is also culprit for this situation

 

[ghazi52]

.,.,.,

https://twitter.com/x/status/1513119964869369860

.,.,.,

 

[V. Makarov]

Why the hatred towards COAS Bajwa?

Kiu ke ab logo ko ch*tiya banana zara mushkil sa ho gya hai.

 

[Tariq Habib Afridi]

That's not his role.

His role is to do what the PM says.

Why did the current man force his own extension? Running from SC to PMO to Parliament to ensure it gets done, even Nawaz Sharif got magically released to ensure that N League also votes in favor of the extension in Parliament.

People don't understand that there has been no legal basis for extensions (till it was forced this time) --- anybody who seeks or accepts one is automatically a traitor, and those who sit around in Corps Commander's Conferences twiddling their thumbs while this happens are part of the problem.

I totally Agree with you no extension whatsover and let the senior most become COAS.

 

[ghazi52]

.,..,.,.
This photo will be a haunting memory of what happened on April 10, 2022: a coup against an elected prime minister.

It will also be a long-cherished image of the love and respect Imran Khan's party members have for him.

Massive respect for Ali Mohammad Khan, akela hee data raha







,.,.,.,

 

[Tariq Habib Afridi]

that is an obvious plausible story, but do u think someone in another city can actually make so many moves n the pindi guy lets him do all those things? If it was a fight between those two then one of them could have taken the other to task on various military laws and rules. How long does it take we have few examples in Raheel bhai tenure. Rumors everywhere, no one can be absolutely sure about that n unfortunately nothing will be known to us if it was such a plan.

I agree with you too and i just reported the rumour i have heard and your questions are also logical

 

[jedijedi]

Here are my 2 cents on why Gen Bajwa said what he said with respect to US alignment. Before that, a disclaimer.

- I am strictly anti-establishment and anti-meddling in politics by Army.
- I am genuinely not as irked at IK going (cz I had huge differences with his policies) as I am at seeing the likes of Maryam (who i haven't seen talk a genuinely wise sentence in hundreds of hours of her interviews and speeches over the past 7 years) & NS become mainstream again.

BACKGROUND:
- India has a huge internal conflict on the verge of boiling over. Just follow Indian news and you'll see at least 10 vigilante attacks by RWers daily. I am not really into non-profit work but fwiw Genocide Watch has already predicted a Genocide in India.

INDIA AT RISK: Genocide Warning

Gregory Stanton was categorical that these warning signs did not mean that it had begun in the countryBy Anita Joshua | New Delhi | 20 January 2022Clips from the Haridwar event, held from December 17 to 20, were circulated on social media and drew sharp criticism from eminent persons.Genocide...

www.genocidewatch.com

This might have been overexaggerated risk in the past, but its fast becoming real by the day. Hate the US all you like, but it will not like to be seen backing India around this time. There are signs of a slight US shift too.

SIGNS:
Despite tipping India as its anti-China counterweight over the past 1.5 decades, US formed AUKUS, the latest Indo-Pacific primarily anti-China Blok, crucially, without India. It may be a sign that the US is keeping a door other than Quad which includes India.
- Imagine the thinking minds in Washington (not Biden who has no thinking faculties left) looking at India and saying, we can't openly prop India against China as they literally risk genocide internally. US for all its duplicity can't stomach this, or sell it to its public and the west in general.

ADDITIONAL FUEL:
- Russo-Ukraine war hasn't helped India much. India didn't rise up to the friendship challenge and distanced itself from the western anti-Russia crusade.
- India still hasn't signed a single major deal that the US would've loved like F21, F18, F15 despite US courting India for years.
- S400 and CAATSA jibes remain open with India showing signs of being irresponsible with the Brahmos and the slightly older nuclear material private stock incidents.

HICCUP:
- US can't silently abandon one ally (India) without (re)making another but with IK's rigid and somewhat inexplicable mindset, there is a locking of horns and an impasse with the US. IK has RW tendencies, his Afghanistan stance just can't be sugarcoated in any way.

SOLUTION:

- If only Pakistan had no populist in power who has locked horns with the US owing to his rigid nature and the lack of diplomatic chops. Wallah April 9th! NO, I'm not endorsing the conspiracy theory, just that US-Pak relations can improve from it.
- US also has other gains by realigning with Pakistan vis a vis Afghanistan and Iran in general. As miniscule as we are in global impact, we can still be a bridge between US and China. That isn't the case with India.

WHY:
- If our Army read this situation and potential strategic shift right, it could be one of the explanations of what Gen. Bajwa said the other day.

* Disclaimer: I am not saying the govt was toppled by a US conspiracy, i have 0 evidence for that but just presenting one possible explanation of Gen Bajwa's statement. What many read as Army selling itself, may not be true, it is never that simplistic!

 

[The Terminator]

Dollars change minds.

Pakistan’s political crisis, briefly explained

An end to Pakistan’s constitutional crisis. But a political crisis endures.

www.vox.com

Pakistan’s political crisis, briefly explained​

An end to Pakistan’s constitutional crisis. But a political crisis endures.
By Jonathan Guyer@mideastXmidwestjonathan.guyer@vox.com Apr 9, 2022, 7:00am EDT

Share this story​

• Share this on Facebook (opens in new window)
• Share this on Twitter (opens in new window)
• SHAREAll sharing options

Supporters of the ruling Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (Movement for Justice) party rally in Islamabad on April 2, as Prime Minister Imran Khan called on his supporters to take to the streets ahead of a parliamentary no-confidence vote that could see him thrown out of office. Aamir Qureshi/AFP via Getty Images
Editor’s note, April 10: Sunday, Imran Khan received a vote of no confidence from the Pakistani parliament, losing his position as prime minister. A vote on a new prime minister is expected as soon as Monday.
One of Pakistan’s twin crises was resolved this week. The other one, not so much.
On Thursday, the country’s supreme court delivered a historic ruling that resolved a constitutional crisis that took shape last week. The court rebuked Prime Minister Imran Khan, a self-fashioned populist leader and former cricket star who is more celebrity than statesman. Khan, the court ruled, had acted unconstitutionally when he dissolved Pakistan’s Parliament last week in order to avoid losing power through a no-confidence vote.
It was a surprising and reassuring decision, experts in the country’s politics said, given the supreme court’s checkered record as a sometime political ally of Khan. On Thursday, the court sided with the rule of law.
But the underlying political crisis that led to the court’s landmark order endures.
Khan outlandishly blamed the opposition parties’ efforts to oust him on a US-driven foreign conspiracy. Now, the Parliament has been restored and will continue with its no-confidence vote against Khan’s premiership Saturday, likely leading to his ouster and extraordinary elections later this year. Khan, for his part, said that he would “fight” back.
The broader political crisis, however, can be traced to the 2018 election that brought Khan to power. Traditionally, the military is the most significant institution in Pakistan, and it has often intervened to overthrow elected leaders that got in its way. Khan’s rise is inextricable from military influence over politics, and the incumbent prime minister accused the military of a soft coup for manipulating the election in Khan’s favor.
It was a “very controversial election,” says Asfandyar Mir, a researcher at the United States Institute of Peace. “There was a major question over the legitimacy of that electoral exercise and the government that Khan formed could just never escape the shadow of the controversy surrounding that election,” Mir explained.

Pakistan’s cricketer-turned-politician Imran Khan speaks after casting his vote at a polling station during the general election in Islamabad on July 25, 2018. Aamir Qureshi/AFP via Getty Images
More recently, the relationship between the military and Khan has worsened, and that gave the political opposition an opening to act against him. Though it’s not known what role the military played in the supreme court’s ruling, experts note that the harshness of the court’s order suggests the military’s buy-in. “This is part of a larger history of instability in Pakistan in which prime ministers are ousted from power, because they lose the support of Pakistan’s military,” Madiha Afzal, foreign policy fellow at the Brookings Institution, told Vox.

But “even if the court was influenced by the military, it took the right decision,” she says.

Khan’s position weakened domestically​

The political and economic situation set the stage for a challenge to Khan.
After running on a campaign that promised less corruption and more economic opportunity for the poor, Khan has failed to deliver. Inflation is climbing, unemployment is soaring, and a billion-dollar program from the International Monetary Fund has not helped stabilize matters. An international investigation into offshore money from last year, known as the Pandora Papers, showed that Khan’s inner circle had moved money abroad to avoid taxes, in contradiction with Khan’s populist rhetoric.
Khan presided over an anti-corruption witch hunt targeting opposition parties. Indeed, the opposition parties, many of them composed of dynastic leadership and families with old money, are corrupt, and their attempt to oust Khan can be seen as a move to evade further scrutiny, Mir said.
Still, that anti-corruption effort brought the government bureaucracy to a halt. And it’s part of Khan’s broader strongman-style approach to governing that has been ineffective.
Since his start in politics, Khan has depended on the courts. Yasser Kureshi, a researcher in constitutional law at the University of Oxford, says Khan has built his political standing on backing the judiciary. “Imran Khan’s political platform has been built around an anti-corruption populism, where he charges the political class for being corrupt, and in the last 15 years the supreme court has been on a spree of jurisprudence targeting the political corruption of Pakistan's traditional parties,” he explains. “Khan has been the biggest supporter of this jurisprudence as it has validated and legitimized his politics.”
Now, the court appears to have turned against him at a time when the military has also lost faith in Khan. “With Imran Khan, I think that the problem for him is that right now, he has no institutional solutions that he can really turn to,” says Kureshi.

Khan’s relationship with the US has also cooled​

Pakistan is a nuclear-armed country with a population of 220 million; it has built the sixth-largest military in the world, and has clout as a leader in the Islamic world. A longtime participant in the US war on terrorism, Pakistan has also been a conflicted partner, criticized for at times abetting the Taliban.
Khan was elected in 2018, and Mir says that, two years in, the military’s relationship to him began to cool. Khan feuded with the army chief over foreign policy issues, and the military saw Khan’s poor governance as a liability. Last year, Khan’s delays in signing off on a new intelligence chief prompted speculation of more divides between the two.
President Joe Biden did not phone Khan in his initial days in office, though he did call the leader of India, Pakistan’s chief rival. “The Biden administration’s cold shoulder to Imran Khan rubbed him the wrong way,” said Afzal. “Pakistan has just fallen off a little bit of the radar in terms of high-level engagement.”
Khan’s public messaging as a strongman has partially been responsible for agitating the relationship with the US — and by extension, his relationship with the Pakistani military, which wants to be closer to the US.
Most recently, that chill was expressed by Khan’s decision to stay neutral in Russia’s war on Ukraine; Khan visited Moscow just in advance of Russia’s invasion.
And, now, he’s turned to accusations of conspiracy: that the opposition’s stand against him is manufactured by the US. The origins of Khan’s incendiary claims appear to be a diplomatic cable that Pakistan’s ambassador to Washington sent home last month after a meeting with senior State Department official Donald Lu. Whatever criticisms Lu may have conveyed about Pakistan’s foreign policy, Khan’s interpretation of the memo has clearly been blown out of proportion. “When it comes to those allegations, there is no truth to them,” State Department spokesperson Ned Price said last week.
It’s an open question whether his argument will resonate among a Pakistani populace who is suspicious of the United States. One group it’s likely not resonating with: Pakistan’s powerful military.

Pakistan’s Prime Minister Imran Khan (third from left) and President Arif Alvi (fourth from left) watch Pakistan’s fighter jets perform during a parade in Islamabad on March 23. Ghulam Rasool/AFP via Getty Images
Khan is “critical of the United States to a point that makes the military uncomfortable,” said Shamila Chaudhary, an expert at the New America think tank. “The way he’s talking about the United States is preventing the US relationship with Pakistan from being repaired, and it needs to be repaired.”
Meanwhile, the Biden administration’s focus in Asia has been on great-power competition with China and two national security crises (the Afghanistan withdrawal and Russia’s Ukraine invasion). The sloppy withdrawal of US forces from Afghanistan furthered the disconnect between Washington and Islamabad, according to Chaudhary, and further upset Pakistan’s government.

Robin Raphel, a former ambassador who served as a senior South Asia official in the State Department from 1993 to 1997, described Biden’s outlook to Pakistan as a “non-approach approach.”
“I’m a diplomat, and, I believe you get more with honey than vinegar,” she said. “It would have been more than worth it for the president to take five minutes to call Imran Khan.”
The US did send its top State Department official for human rights, Uzra Zeya, to the Organization of Islamic Countries summit in Pakistan last month. Zeya also met with the country’s foreign minister and senior officials, as the two countries celebrated the 75th anniversary of diplomatic relations.
But there hasn’t been more than that in terms of a positive message for the US-Pakistan relationship in light of the recent political and constitutional crises in the country. Price’s recent comments on the situation were brief: “We support Pakistan’s constitutional process and the rule of law.”

What happens next​

Once the Parliament completes its no-confidence vote, which may happen as soon as today, it will dissolve the government. The country’s electoral commission will then oversee a caretaker government that will likely be headed by the leader of the opposition, Shehbaz Sharif. (Sharif is the brother of Nawaz Sharif, a former prime minister himself, who is currently living in exile in the UK as he faces accusations of corruption.) And, in that forthcoming vote, Khan will most probably lose.
But even the specifics of those elections are contentious. Khan had asked the electoral commission to set a date within the next 90 days; opposition politicians told NPR that reforms are needed before the next vote, otherwise they say the military will “rig” the next elections.
Long-term, things are even less clear. Among civil society leaders in Pakistan, there is agreement that the supreme court’s ruling is good for constitutionalism. But it may also be a vehicle for further expansion of the judiciary’s ability to intervene in politics.
Kureshi, an expert on the courts of Pakistan and how they have increasingly become the arbiter of politics in the country, says the bigger takeaways won’t be fully understood until the court releases the full text of its ruling in the next month or so. That detailed order may set other legal precedents and even cast the opposition in a bad light.
After the immediate euphoria of keeping Khan’s audacious unconstitutional maneuver in check, that judgment may say a lot about how the court sees itself, especially its supervisory role over the parliament and prime minister.
“The elected institutions are deeply constrained by the tutelage of overly empowered unelected institutions, whether it is the military, historically, or the judiciary more recently,” said Kureshi. “Judgments like this give them an opportunity to further affirm and expand that role.”

Lol it adds nothing new to the info. There are some stark mistakes in this article and how it's been composed clearly shows Anti-IK ism. Their imported sources are also weak in comprehending ground realities.

I can't make anything out of it except some vague general history of past 3 years.