What economic sanctions? I already showed you that in fact it was the very opposite and every dictator enjoyed full support of the power houses such as US. Never once was Pakistan sanctioned economically just because civilian governments were shown the door. Ayub, Yahya, Zia, Musharraf all enjoyed popular support from the West. Why would it be any different this time?
Also you say you are glad Nawaz chose the bigger picture, the only thing Nawaz chose was to remain in power irrespective of how much he had to concede if i were to take your argument at face value regarding dharna putting Nawaz under pressure for power sharing. When you claim that Nawaz was forced to accede power sharing agreement with the military, than you cannot claim that he did it under some larger interest of the country because how could he deliver on those interests when he is giving away power and the argument of economic sanctions does not hold weight. History is there to prove my point.
USA threatened Pakistan with economical sanction. It is on the record. No world would trade with Pakistan economically if democracy is compromised. USA issued threat to ensure the democracy stays on.
There is the reason why main establishment was forced to work with PMLN given their history of military takeover especially with PMLN. However, they interfered twice under PMLN's ruling, and 3rd military was abruptly stopped according to rumors such as General Raheel warned Musharraf and other party that was allegedly involved in military takeover, and because the economy was unstable, General Raheel decided to work with PMLN in exchange for influence on foreign policy to ensure the economy is stabilized. Both decided to work with each other for the bigger picture with agreed deal that PMLN can rule Pakistan while main establishment can govern foreign policy. It is 50-50 power-sharing agreement as accorded in the year of 2014.
So the agreement is that PMLN can rule Pakistan while main establishment can govern on foreign policy. It is same as USA where Donald Trump has no control over foreign policy either.
Despite the fact that General Ayub, Musharraf and Zia-ul-Haq enjoyed immensely support from USA doesn't change the fact that USA did issue the threat with economical sanction. In the past, USA needed Pakistan hence chose to look other way around in regards to Zia-ul-Haq's ruling despite building Nuclear program because USA needed Pakistan to resist USSR in Afghanistan. Then USA needed Pakistan for war on terror during the ruling of Musharraf. Even during the ruling of General Ayub, USA successfully persuaded him not to get involved in IOK during 1962 at the time of war between China and India. Pakistan had chance to grab IOK but USA kept General Ayub Khan at bay in exchange for economical support.
This time the situation is different. The alliance is changing and so is geopolitical. And this time USA might not look kindly on Pakistan, in fact USA is waiting for Pakistan to make that mistake so USA can use the excuse to issue economical sanction ever since Pakistan's diplomatic relationship with China/Russia has been going well especially CPEC as well. The game is changing.
The main establishment understand the situation hence agreed to work with PMLN. I am just surprised PMLN didn't take the opportunity to make main establishment look bad but maybe, PMLN didn't want to risk Pakistan facing economical sanction. For that reason alone, i respect PMLN just like i respect PPP for its diplomatic stance on Balochistan for years under PPP ruling to undo the damage left by General Musharraf. Because of Zardari's diplomatic stance on Balochistan, PMLN was able to fast-track CPEC successfully with the support of Balochistan.
Ok, please enlighten me. What is the establishment that you are referring to? The Army? PMLN politicians? ISI?
If you don't know who is main establishment, then you shouldn't partake on the topic in debate which you know nothing of.
Source? No economic sanction has been placed on Iran since the lifting of them by Obama, why would India stop cooperating with them?
Because India is with Donald Trump that has ensured anti-Iran stance, hence Chahabar port is out of question. Why do you think all of the sudden Iran decided to get closer with Pakistan? Do the math.
Its an opportunity, and one that was wasted. It is nothing but an insult that Trump lists all these other countries as victims, including ones not even present at the summit, but ignores Pakistan, a NATO ally and a country that made far larger sacrifices in the American War on Terror.
Obviously, you don't understand the geopolitical situation. So your confusion is expected.
With respect, I think there are much more than the eyes can meet!!! Anyway, I've liked the official position - this is the way to go!!!!
Maybe. But Pakistan's neutral stance on KSA-Iran means Pakistan is looking for the bigger picture instead of getting involved into proxy war on sectarian ground. Pakistan understands that it is unity that can thrive, not divide on sectarian grounds. In fact, Pakistan knows that both KSA and Iran are over as their persistence with sectarian wars will be their end game. That is exactly what enemy wants.
I am glad Pakistan chose to look for the bigger picture which may not sit well with KSA.
Excellent point. It looks as if he wants to criticize Nawaz Sharif for almost everything. After being outsmarted and outwitted by Noora, almost every step of the way, Imran Khan wants point scoring.
By the way, i am not noora if by definition, supporter of PMLN.
Right now, i am pro-stability. With Imran Khan in power, the situation could be worse like Donald Trump for USA and Modi for India. No offense to Imranistan.
Oye khuda ka khof kar aur sharam kar ....jhooot boltay huay tum logo ko zara bhi sharam nahin ati
You can argue that my post might be speculation but am i lying? How exactly am i lying to be honest?
