Pakistan's Overbearing Army

[fatman17]

How disgusting, how obscene! that those whose life is a saga of sacrifice and service should now be tarred for at least trying to solve Pakistan's problems.

I just checked my posts. no where have I (or for that matter anyone else) has derided the army in anyway.

If muse is referring to the original article with its title (which may be argued as harsh), the major point being made IMHO is the importance of the army to play its constitutional role and let the democratic process get a foot-hold in this country. let us have many elections so that we can weed out the zardari's, nawaz's and the lot and put in place people who will make the right decisions for Pakistan. a govt. which has the respect of all pakistanis and the rest of the world.

That was my thrust for putting up the article in the first place. and finally, I am fully aware of the "saga of sacrifice" of the armed forces and I am proud of it.

 

[S-2]

Pakistan's largest klepto political class is it's senior military leadership. No element of Pakistani society so dominates it's internal and external perspectives nor has since inception. No class is so collectively rewarded and recognized. No class is so interested in perpetuating the dual myths of intractable Indian hostility and the good fortune of Pakistan's citizens to be protected from such by it's military.

Bluntly, it's easily argued that your nation is too poor to afford a military postured to make war with India. Whatever your current correlation of forces, the gap will only widen if you're required to foot the bill. Meanwhile, you've a real and very unpopular war in the west. Many suggest it's most unpopular foremost among the senior leadership of the military.

Certainly, the forces are neither trained, equipped, nor pre-disposed to fight this real war. Instead they are prepared and equipped to face the day when India will never come across the Punjab border. Nice scam.

While a true counter-insurgent campaign is required in the west, with each passing day of delay the enemy becomes more entrenched and able to resist the inroads of the Pakistani army. It's likely that in much of FATA your forces cannot enter many areas without fighting your way in and that the enemy will not run from certain areas but will instead resist voraciously. In those areas, the war has moved beyond a counter-insurgency and is actually the conventional reconquest of a portion of your nation occupied by a foreign power with the culpable assistance of a good segment of your mis-guided but disillusioned citizenry.

The longer it takes to implement a comprehensive change to your military's primary orientation and internal culture, the more likely that you'll lose FATA and possibly your nation from within.

Now that's just me and I'm a yank whose only real interest is to get my greedy, grabby hands on all your nukes so I'm sure that you guys will take my thoughts with the properly applied grain of salt.

 

[fatman17]

Now that's just me and I'm a yank whose only real interest is to get my greedy, grabby hands on all your nukes so I'm sure that you guys will take my thoughts with the properly applied grain of salt.

...and the hits just keep on coming!

 

[Kasrkin]

The system of Pakistani ‘democracy’ in MHO is irrevocably and inherently flawed maybe because it’s not real democracy at all, or maybe our people are just not suited for it…or perhaps a mixture of both these factors. I just dunno yet. But I’m always hard pressed to agree with those people who insist that civilian ‘popularly elected’ governments have achieved more for this country than so called ‘military dictators’. I also find it hard to ignore the fact that given the opportunity many of our ‘civilian’ leaders are more than capable of becoming real dictators, and in fact have become exactly so in the past. Whenever civilian governments have been dismissed by the military in Pakistan it has been through widespread popular encouragement. When Ayub, Zia, Musharraf came in there were celebrations on the streets, barely any protests. I’m not sure this will continue to be the case at least for the next 10 years or so, but I feel something would be amiss if I didn’t point out that the PA has not always sought to impose itself on the country as some Indians (and others) might prefer to believe. Whatever the Army did, they thought it was the best thing to do for the country at that time (and so did the large chunk of the population by the looks of it). Hindsight will obviously leave us with many things to criticize, but we should not be so quick to jump to conclusions without recalling the context and inclinations of the time.

I feel a military-civil structure in Pakistan can work, if I maybe so bold as to suggest something along the lines of what has been achieved in Turkey. It is important that the military does not come directly in the line of fire like in Musharraf’s time, but it is important that they are there in the bigger picture. Or so I feel.

 

[Kasrkin]

No class is so collectively rewarded and recognized. No class is so interested in perpetuating the dual myths of intractable Indian hostility

This is very presumptuous S-2, and it is not a very Pakistani friendly view either. As it is, you've obviously not met the religious parties here...so I won’t be too harsh.

Bluntly, it's easily argued that your nation is too poor to afford a military postured to make war with India.

So were (and probably are) the Israelis. In terms of man power and economy too in 1967 and 1973, surrounded by a whole region of oil rich hostile Arab states. It didn't change their outlook or priorities or policies, and it would be unreasonable for you to expect such change in Pakistan either. At least not until Kashmir is resolved. Its part of our identity, part of our mind frame...you might not like it because it causes some inconvenience to your short term agenda, but all the same. India has always had more resources than us, and furthermore they have been militarizing and modernizing at a faster rate than us right from the 50s as well. We're still here, very much in the game. I don't think a nation of 160 million will be inclined to change because you think so. And trust me it’s NOT just the military here that doesn’t have a very flattering view of the Indians…

 

[fatman17]

the army can have a strong influence on policy matters without actually taking over the country.

a proper balance is required with equal emphasis on defence, economy, education, in short nation building.

when i was a young kid and lived in the clean cantonments, life was such a thrill till you went outside the cantonments, and saw things in a different light and it made you wonder "why"! it is still the same after 50 years.

 

[S-2]

"...And trust me it’s NOT just the military here that doesn’t have a very flattering view of the Indians…"

I understand completely. In fact, that may be my ultimate point. Your military has promoted and made certain that public perception. It's long been in their best interests to do so.

It makes clear the discomfort with the war in FATA and the race of two divisions from that border back to their traditional deployments in eastern Punjab.

We'll see what comes of that but I'm certain that they won't be pulling any triggers along the Indian border. FATA is different with real soldiering, dying, and very little public glory.

Sorta hard to regear the narrative after so long.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

No class is so interested in perpetuating the dual myths of intractable Indian hostility and the good fortune of Pakistan's citizens to be protected from such by it's military.

The 'myth' of intractable Indian hostility? Surely you do not need me to give you a history lesson on the very real history of Indian hostility.

And are you so oblivious to the wardrums being beaten in New Delhi, even now?

And it is not Pakistan that is refusing to implement UNSC resolutions that outline a means of resolution to the Kashmir dispute.

The only 'myth' here is one of a 'lack of Indian hostility', blithely perpetuated to support the argument of the Pakistani military being the cause of all ills in Pakistan.

Certainly, the forces are neither trained, equipped, nor pre-disposed to fight this real war. Instead they are prepared and equipped to face the day when India will never come across the Punjab border. Nice scam.

That 'scam' is probably the only thing preventing the Indians from doing a Gaza in Pakistan right now.

The only 'scam', in the light of the Israeli action in Gaza and the Indian hostility and belligerence in the aftermath of Mumbai, is the argument that Pakistani investment in its military and nuclear program has been in pursuit of shadows.

I do not disagree that terrorism poses an existential threat to Pakistan, and that Pakistan must gear herself to face those challenges, but terrorisms cross border implications, as seen in Mumbai, also necessitate a strong conventional deterrent to ward of external threats and allow Pakistan the space to fight internal challenges.

 

[Kasrkin]

Your military has promoted and made certain that public perception.

Now I'd be delighted to see some proof to this end, and not just articles written by some Indians. But some real scholars or some research work or anything in the way of evidence or definitive concrete information that would make your claims more than just an uneducated assumption like if for example I were to say that the IDF "has promoted and made certain that public perception" about Israel’s security being precarious (I would have referred to the Cold War and the demonization of the "evil" Soviet Empire by your military but then I supposed you might not be inclined to dispute that attribution). Thanks !

 

[fatman17]

to face the day when India will never come across the Punjab border. Nice scam.

its been done before in 1971 albeit on our former eastern border now BD. 18 divisions against 3 regular army divisions. pretty clear-cut what the outcome was. of course no one talks about the "saga of sacrifices" because we lost.

OTOH. the indians almost pulled it off in 1987 with Operation Brasstacks with Gen. Sunderji only to be "rebuffed" by a surprisingly quick PA strike corps manoevour in the north. the Indian "Hawks" are braying for blood. only the US is standing in their way.

 

[Kasrkin]

the Indian "Hawks" are braying for blood. only the US is standing in their way.

You have to hand it to the Americans sir, they sure know how to look after their interests which at the moment correspond with ours as far as preventing the Indians from letting their ambitions of "superpower-hood" get ahead of their good sense in regards to Pakistan's borders. But this interest in seeing Pakistani forces committed to the west won’t be there forever...Americans gotta go home some day.

 

[Brown]

well answer to all these question is simple.
military is biggest institution in Pakistan.


Since 1971 hysteria of constant threat from india is created.
which forced for larger military budget(5% or more than 5% of GDP).

Each civilian government perused unpopular policies which force in some cases unrest in Pakistan and forced military to take over.
Need not mention money given by US to use them as apparatus of there foreign policy in this region.

Being a single entity to receive largest part of budget I do not see why it should not have all these facility that you have mentioned.

after all these its only victory it can claim from all it existence is Taliban taking over Kabul.

Source for all the above info is from below video by Tariq Ali(Tariq Ali )
YouTube - Conversations With History - Tariq Ali

 

[S-2]

Thanks for the neat thoughts, fellas.

"Americans gotta go home some day."

Don't hold your breath. Meanwhile it is your good forture that we don't as you couldn't afford your current conventional posture with India, much less where THAT trajectory lies nor can you effectively fight your own rebellion in the west.

I suspect that you'd have to surrender functional sovereignty in the west to maintain your forces in their current manner facing the Indians. The militants might be placated with that...for awhile anyway.

I'm sure my ideas don't fit a comfortable narrative but I'm not the only that's thinking this way about your military culture. fatman17, you're working the edges when you talk about life in the cantonments as a child and you know it. The calculus isn't that complex and something in the way you do business isn't adding up to an effective nation.

The Indians aren't crossing the border-ever. Not with large conventional ground forces. What would they do with you- occupy Pakistan? Nothing weakens your nation's functional defense more than to stand poised on your eastern frontiers waiting for something that isn't going to come.

I'm reticent to underwrite your nation where your continuing nat'l security policies reap havoc on the larger picture which is the unbearable social costs associated with this. I personally need more imaginative and out-of-the-box thinking than is being displayed here.

True nat'l security is predicated on far more than an up-to-date order of battle list.

My nation is making hard choices about which wars we'll fight and how we'll do so. Costs affect choices as nobody subsidizes our defense expenditures.

I guess that you're more fortunate there for the time being.

 

[kidwaibhai]

i think there is slow realization in our nation security quarters that the larger threat is eminating from the west rather than from the east. evidence of that would be the recent interview of the DG ISI with the german magazine in which he said that there will be no war with india and that the greater threat is from the terrorist.
i have to say after reading that i do think that we are moving towards that right direction when it comes to our national security. but i still think that we need to maintain the conventional deterrent in case of any indian adventurism. which so eloquently spouted by indian elites ( including military) after the incident in mumbia

 

[Patriot]

Agreed.We need to remove this cancer (Extremeism/Talibinization) from Pakistan.