Has the Pakistani army given up defending it's people?

[Ghareeb_Da_Baal]

sorry we are busy fvcking Pakistanis.who the heck are kashmiris?

 

[SaadH]

Not all actions will be published.

Remember how Indian Army received headless mutilated bodies in the past.

You are confirmed bhindian now...

 

[old boy]

I believe the title of this thread is a bit harsh.

There are several sectors along LOC where Indians look right into our necks. And then are others where is the other way around. Present ROE is very much clear to both sides. If they have opened fire at a sector where they are dominating geographically, it's always answered with immediate retaliation in those sectors where we are at the top.

And then, response from Pak army doesn't get always through to the media or Twitter. If that were the case, every days news would be full of LOC only.

Why there is no retaliation from PA when they see their unarmed civilian citizens are being killed so mercilessly . Why not indian forces on Loc fire warning shots first to alert any one who by mistake crosses over to lok before hitting him directly or govt.of Pakistan should take some preventive measures to protect lives of their citizens and a well measured and calculated response should also be given to indian forces at the spot to let them understands the results of such unprovoked aggression.

 

[mangochutney]

Earlier on May 15, Parveen Fatima, a 65-year-old widow from the Pandu sector of AJK’s Jhelum valley district, was also mercilessly killed by the Indian army after she had strayed across the LoC while picking some medicinal plants.



Response from Pakistani army Nothing.



From this thread;

Two martyred, one injured after Indian forces open fire at shepherds at LoC: ISPR

.,., Two martyred, one injured after Indian forces open fire at shepherds at LoC: ISPR Iftikhar Shirazi June 24, 2023 Two civilians embraced martyrdom on Saturday while one other was “critically injured” as the Indian Army opened “indiscriminate fire” at a group of shepherds at the Line of...

defence.pk

seems Kashmiris will have to fight both combined forces of India and Pakistan now for freedom .

time to say to pak army go home your service is over and call in taliban who are more capable.

Bro , we are treated like shit in Pakistan on way home to kashmir
Stopped searched harassed by the Pakistanis as if we are scum

Guaranteed I will get pulled over as if I’m a two bit criminal and d asking personal questions

Where are you going , what for , give us some money say the Punjab police as soon as they spot our registration plate

 

[waz]

I believe the title of this thread is a bit harsh.

There are several sectors along LOC where Indians look right into our necks. And then are others where is the other way around. Present ROE is very much clear to both sides. If they have opened fire at a sector where they are dominating geographically, it's always answered with immediate retaliation in those sectors where we are at the top.

And then, response from Pak army doesn't get always through to the media or Twitter. If that were the case, every days news would be full of LOC only.

Sorry if it sounded harsh. I understand the situation on the LOC very well as that is where my ancestral land is, my family regiment is the AJKR and my forefathers founded the AKRF along with others.
Had there been retaliatory action we would have heard about it, and this isn't the first time. It seems the higher ups are not concerned anymore.

 

[Path-Finder]

the people of Pakistan is the target of the army.

 

[HAIDER]

For those who served in the army, what is the protocol to suppress incoming fire or if visible post fire on civilians living 500 or more across enemy fire range?

 

[blain2]

Let's be realists and have clarity instead of the constant griping about surrender this and that purely because the political situation is not to the liking of some here. This frustration seeps into every discussion concerning the fauj.

On the LoC, action is taken as is needed and it has been explained there is a method to the madness there (see PK's note).

To those who are reverting to the conversation between Zehra Naseem, that third-rate TTP spokesman (of late a WashPo contributor) and Gen Bajwa, keep in mind it was a factual conversation. There are challenges with keeping the army running. Gone is all the CSF funding. The defense budget in absolute value has gone down with inflationary adjustments, while the Indian defense budget is larger than Pakistan's entire national budget so what do we expect a sitting CoAS to do? Should he continue to push the "sab achhaa" narrative? What happens in the next round when we have equipment inadequacies against Indians? Would we not want to highlight those now?

I don't see anyone complaining about the Indian CoAS or CAS suggesting their service is hamstrung because they only have 31 squadrons against a sanctioned strength of 40-42 sqns or when the former said he does not have enough tanks with night fighting capabilities. So which idiot has a problem here when our sitting CoAS calls out deficiencies in his force? Is it not his job to say such things? Is force readiness not his concern?

For all the silly comments about taking Kashmir or getting even, well you want that then put your money where you mouth is. First fund the military to the tune of $30-40B to talk of taking Kashmir etc. We are operating with less than $10B across 3 services against a $60B funded military on the other side. This is like asking a 4 ft chap to fight a 7 ft ogre. And the situation is as such that if the chap says I have disadvantages, people here are abusive of the smaller chap for calling out those issues.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Let's be realists and have clarity instead of the constant griping about surrender this purely because the political situation is not to the liking of some here. This frustration seeps into every discussion concerning the fauj.

On the LoC, action is taken as is needed and it has been explained there is a method to the madness there (see PK's note).

To those who are reverting to the conversation between Zehra Naseem, that third-rate TTP spokesman (of late a WashPo contributor) and Gen Bajwa, keep in mind it was a factual conversation. There are challenges with keeping the army running. Gone is all the CSF funding. The defense budget in absolute value has gone down with inflationary adjustments, while the Indian defense budget is larger than Pakistan's entire national budget so what do we expect a sitting CoAS to do? Should he continue to push the "sab achhaa" narrative? What happens in the next round when we have equipment inadequacies against Indians? Would we not want to highlight those now?

I don't see anyone complaining about the Indian CoAS or CAS suggesting their service is hamstrung because they only have 31 squadrons against a sanctioned strength of 40-42 sqns or when the former said he does not have enough tanks with night fighting capabilities. So which idiot has a problem here when our sitting CoAS calls out deficiencies in his force? Is it not his job to say such things? Is force readiness not his concern?

For all the silly comments about taking Kashmir or getting even, well you want that then put your money where you mouth is. First fund the military to the tune of $30-40B to talk of taking Kashmir etc. We are operating with less than $10B across 3 services against a $60B funded military on the other side. This is like asking a 4 ft chap to fight a 7 ft ogre. And the situation is as such that if the chap says I have disadvantages, people here are abusive of the smaller chap for calling out those issues.

...ok...but how are Pakistanis going to improve the economy when they have minimal to zero agency in deciding their political leadership (whom the Army influences one way or another)? Or with minimal access to the economy itself due to rent-seeking elites (tied into or backed by Army)? Or even within military-run SOEs which aren't properly headed by the value creating R&D people, but generals?

Just one example... we're not going to build an effective tax revenue collection system on real estate and agriculture land because the ones deciding policy are tied into those sectors.

Another one, we're not driving R&D growth because the only entities with any R&D life are headed by generals who are parachuted into leadership with limited expertise on the teams and orgs they're heading up. So, we can't drive innovation or leverage that for exports. @JamD @SQ8

Or how about the rent seeking elites in the auto sector who are shielded from doing more other than assembling. God knows why, but no one at the top of our political leadership care about market protection. They don't force foreign auto makers to achieve a 50-70% value localization goal when selling cars in Pakistan, thus causing us to lose foreign currency as well as miss out on key high tech jobs and the potential to use our large market to achieve scale and drive exports. And yes, the Army shields these elites by ensuring that corrupt politicians lead the country (as they're the ones who generally acquiesce to the generals' interests, IK included BTW). In some cases (not auto specifically) generals may be individually involved in such rent seeking businesses themselves.

Let's not forget the decades of dictatorships who did have the chance to invest in education, skills development, etc to make us economically more competitive. Instead, we got drugs, militancy, territorial loss, and (thanks to Mushy) import-driven economic growth that scuttled local industries and made us aid (and later, loan) reliant.

 

[blain2]

...ok...but how are Pakistanis going to improve the economy when they have minimal to zero agency in deciding their political leadership (whom the Army influences one way or another)? Or with minimal access to the economy itself due to rent-seeking elites (tied into or backed by Army)? Or even within military-run SOEs which aren't properly headed by the value creating R&D people, but generals?

Just one example... we're not going to build an effective tax revenue collection system on real estate and agriculture land because the ones deciding policy are tied into those sectors.

It can be done. It has been done in Egypt, it is being done in Myanmar, it was done in Ayub's time and it was done in both Zia and Musharraf's time. Incremental but improvements nonetheless.

Chinese have improved their economy in a completely authoritarian setup as did Singapore (I am not supporting this or suggesting it) so having a voice/agency is not a must-have. Pakistan has a lot of foundational issues which can be sorted out with a little focus. Whether a guided democratic facade or a full-fledged democracy gets us there remains to be seen. In the broader world, there are examples of successes and failures with both.

The problem that you describe for Pakistan isn't unique. There are similar mafias and cartels in all countries including in the first-world that get in the way with their special interests or slowing down progress or something which is to the benefit of the masses.

 

[Great Janjua]

I believe the title of this thread is a bit harsh.

There are several sectors along LOC where Indians look right into our necks. And then are others where is the other way around. Present ROE is very much clear to both sides. If they have opened fire at a sector where they are dominating geographically, it's always answered with immediate retaliation in those sectors where we are at the top.

And then, response from Pak army doesn't get always through to the media or Twitter. If that were the case, every days news would be full of LOC only.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1674787940839612417

Am sure getting your people killed and their bodies robbed off to the other side of the LOC is forgivable right.. as long as we let off a few warning shots in areas we dominate.

Its fair to say the army clearly has lost the plot due to international pressure on kashmir issue enacted by India they will tolerate body bags as long as western string pullers are happy.

 

[Sayfullah]

Let's be realists and have clarity instead of the constant griping about surrender this and that purely because the political situation is not to the liking of some here. This frustration seeps into every discussion concerning the fauj.

On the LoC, action is taken as is needed and it has been explained there is a method to the madness there (see PK's note).

To those who are reverting to the conversation between Zehra Naseem, that third-rate TTP spokesman (of late a WashPo contributor) and Gen Bajwa, keep in mind it was a factual conversation. There are challenges with keeping the army running. Gone is all the CSF funding. The defense budget in absolute value has gone down with inflationary adjustments, while the Indian defense budget is larger than Pakistan's entire national budget so what do we expect a sitting CoAS to do? Should he continue to push the "sab achhaa" narrative? What happens in the next round when we have equipment inadequacies against Indians? Would we not want to highlight those now?

I don't see anyone complaining about the Indian CoAS or CAS suggesting their service is hamstrung because they only have 31 squadrons against a sanctioned strength of 40-42 sqns or when the former said he does not have enough tanks with night fighting capabilities. So which idiot has a problem here when our sitting CoAS calls out deficiencies in his force? Is it not his job to say such things? Is force readiness not his concern?

For all the silly comments about taking Kashmir or getting even, well you want that then put your money where you mouth is. First fund the military to the tune of $30-40B to talk of taking Kashmir etc. We are operating with less than $10B across 3 services against a $60B funded military on the other side. This is like asking a 4 ft chap to fight a 7 ft ogre. And the situation is as such that if the chap says I have disadvantages, people here are abusive of the smaller chap for calling out those issues.

If the army doesn’t have money they can step aside and let people freely go and fight in Kashmir. Army doesn’t allow mujahideen to operate freely in IOK and wants to keep them under their control but then complains about money.
If they really care about Kashmir then they would stop tryna put a leash around every Kashmiri mujahideen group.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

It can be done. It has been done in Egypt, it is being done in Myanmar, it was done in Ayub's time and it was done in both Zia and Musharraf's time. Incremental but improvements nonetheless.

Chinese have improved their economy in a completely authoritarian setup as did Singapore (I am not supporting this or suggesting it) so having a voice/agency is not a must-have. Pakistan has a lot of foundational issues which can be sorted out with a little focus. Whether a guided democratic facade or a full-fledged democracy gets us there remains to be seen. In the broader world, there are examples of successes and failures with both.

The problem that you describe for Pakistan isn't unique. There are similar mafias and cartels in all countries including in the first-world that get in the way with their special interests or slowing down progress or something which is to the benefit of the masses.

Egypt isn't doing well economically bro, its fundamentals are as borked as Pakistan, but they have stronger ties with neighbors to help drive trade and investment to keep them chugging.

I wouldn't credit Musharraf or even Zia ul Haq for any real economic improvement either. What they did was funnel US aid into the economy while mismanaging the actual value-creating sectors.

So, for example, Musharraf leveraged US aid to keep the PKR high (as aid is a foreign currency inflow). In turn, many new economic actors used this situation to start importing goods and re-selling them in Pakistan. This did create GDP growth (i.e., it expanded the consumer sector), but it was through imports that relied on the PKR remaining high which, in turn, was built on US aid inflows (plus remittances plus some exports).

Unfortunately, the local producers couldn't compete with the imports and, being part of the rent-seeking elite, didn't make any investment in elevating their own game. Coupled with the fact that we also didn't invest in education or R&D capacity building, even those who had dreamed of doing more just couldn't when left to rely on only Pakistanis. So, a lot of our local initiatives relied on foreign inputs (e.g., engines, electronics, etc), thereby leaving us out from the most lucrative global trade markets.

Anyways, once Musharraf went, the PPP did their plundering and mismanagement while also forcing an IMF austerity package (which likely further cut spending on real R&D, valuable skill development and education initiatives). Then the PML came and, interestingly, they did continue Musharraf's economic policy, but with one difference: instead of aid, they used loans to keep the PKR high. And, as history goes, that left us with a mountain of other problems that the PTI had to deal with (but couldn't really because it had no real hooks in the decision-making of the country, that was left to the core group of generals, elites, landowners, etc).

I do agree with you that the problem isn't that we're not a democracy. Ultimately, a democracy is just a political system with its own set of institutions and it in itself doesn't result in economic development. Likewise of authoritarian states. They're capable of economic development, but them being authoritarian doesn't result in it. The main issue here is that we have corrupt actors helming our power structures and preventing any sort of real change. It hurts to say this, but our generals are part of this group of corrupt actors.

Bring the power structures into the hands of sincere and capable people, and we'll do fine. The question is, do we have it in us to make the tough calls about those in the way of our progress? You want to bring up China, well, we know how the Chinese dealt with their obstacles...twice...first as a united front against occupiers, and then internally which spawned two very capable economies (China and Taiwan). The Japanese also had their Meiji Restoration (which shuffled out one group of elites in favour of a new group that wanted to rapidly industrialize Japan)

Even India...I absolutely hate them for how they treat Muslims, but look at their mentality and how they're dealing with what they perceive to be an obstacle to their national progress (i.e., Islam). If we Pakistanis had their type of aggression but directed towards our corrupt elites, then we'd be on a whole other level too. Perhaps, maybe, Pakistanis are reaching that key turning point...

Simply put, the obstacles in Pakistan are people, and those people wear all sorts of costumes -- some uniforms, some waistcoats, some suits, some kameez, etc -- and they all gotta go. They're OK characters in a drama I guess, but not in real life.

 

[PakFactor]

It can be done. It has been done in Egypt, it is being done in Myanmar, it was done in Ayub's time and it was done in both Zia and Musharraf's time. Incremental but improvements nonetheless.

Chinese have improved their economy in a completely authoritarian setup as did Singapore (I am not supporting this or suggesting it) so having a voice/agency is not a must-have. Pakistan has a lot of foundational issues which can be sorted out with a little focus. Whether a guided democratic facade or a full-fledged democracy gets us there remains to be seen. In the broader world, there are examples of successes and failures with both.

The problem that you describe for Pakistan isn't unique. There are similar mafias and cartels in all countries including in the first-world that get in the way with their special interests or slowing down progress or something which is to the benefit of the masses.

Bhai, Egypt isn't close to being a strong economy; it's running on GCC funds to keep itself afloat; they are in an equally, if not worse, position than Pakistan.

 

[nahtanbob]

Egypt isn't doing well economically bro, its fundamentals are as borked as Pakistan, but they have stronger ties with neighbors to help drive trade and investment to keep them chugging.

I wouldn't credit Musharraf or even Zia ul Haq for any real economic improvement either. What they did was funnel US aid into the economy while mismanaging the actual value-creating sectors.

So, for example, Musharraf leveraged US aid to keep the PKR high (as aid is a foreign currency inflow). In turn, many new economic actors used this situation to start importing goods and re-selling them in Pakistan. This did create GDP growth (i.e., it expanded the consumer sector), but it was through imports that relied on the PKR remaining high which, in turn, was built on US aid inflows (plus remittances plus some exports).

Unfortunately, the local producers couldn't compete with the imports and, being part of the rent-seeking elite, didn't make any investment in elevating their own game. Coupled with the fact that we also didn't invest in education or R&D capacity building, even those who had dreamed of doing more just couldn't when left to rely on only Pakistanis. So, a lot of our local initiatives relied on foreign inputs (e.g., engines, electronics, etc), thereby leaving us out from the most lucrative global trade markets.

Anyways, once Musharraf went, the PPP did their plundering and mismanagement while also forcing an IMF austerity package (which likely further cut spending on real R&D, valuable skill development and education initiatives). Then the PML came and, interestingly, they did continue Musharraf's economic policy, but with one difference: instead of aid, they used loans to keep the PKR high. And, as history goes, that left us with a mountain of other problems that the PTI had to deal with (but couldn't really because it had no real hooks in the decision-making of the country, that was left to the core group of generals, elites, landowners, etc).

I do agree with you that the problem isn't that we're not a democracy. Ultimately, a democracy is just a political system with its own set of institutions and it in itself doesn't result in economic development. Likewise of authoritarian states. They're capable of economic development, but them being authoritarian doesn't result in it. The main issue here is that we have corrupt actors helming our power structures and preventing any sort of real change. It hurts to say this, but our generals are part of this group of corrupt actors.

Bring the power structures into the hands of sincere and capable people, and we'll do fine.

The difference between India and Pakistan can be summed up in these two rows on literacy rates

India

1951			18.33
1961			28.3

Pakistan

1951			16.3
1961			16.2

Pakistan has never caught up