What's new

Policeman martyred, dozens injured in Islamabad clashes; Army called

The army cares more about the nations stability than it does of democracy. If they did indeed follow the governments orders and confront the protestors that's not exactly a stellar image as well. Soldiers running around with batons beating the common man, shooting tear gas or in the worst case scenario shooting with bullets.

In all cases the route the army chose was probably the best. There was no great or good option in this event. They intervened but only a little. They didn't send troops to climb the PTV building or go to Raiwand.

These dharnas weren't by accident as @Shane pointed out. It was politically driven.
I have been around quite a few of these incidents in the past as well thus I too share your view about why Army should not be used in policing of demonstrations and against our own populace. My bigger problem is the way Army mediated almost publicly. That made the Army look bad and worse, made the government of the day and the judiciary look weak exactly when Pakistan needs to go in the other direction.

In Pakistan, one of the problems afflicting governance is laziness and reactiveness. Everyone waits for the axe to fall and a few moments before, action is taken. The result is always shoddy, ham-fisted and it shows callousness in everything. Had the government of the day been more proactive, none of this would have come to pass. Nobody would have died and the government of the day and the Army would not have been put in such a situation.
 
Last edited:
. .
That made the Army look bad and worse, made the government of the day and the judiciary look weak exactly when Pakistan needs to go in the other direction.

May be that was the whole point - to let everyone know who is the undisputed boss, calculating that the Army's reputation will remain above reproach for the majority.
 
.
Government asking Army to broker peace is NOT illegal.

Government gave written orders to Rangers to do as such.

Your 'clear evidence' is all BS so pretty please with sugar on top, shove your 'diagnosis' back down your throat and STFU!
Well if the operation order was from the court then the court is right.Without taking the court and the legal system into confidence who the hell these politicians are to involve army and do negotiations on their own?
 
.
My bigger problem is the way Army mediated almost publicly

And the reason is obvious too. Army wants the public to know their stance of peaceful settlement of matters so that people like us can counter the blood seeking desi liberal scum spewing venom here and elsewhere.

This approach doesn't damage the reputation of the Army.
 
.
And here is another effup in the making:



My diagnosis remains correct and based upon clear evidence. Illegal meddling always creates more problems than it solves for Pakistan.

Your analysis is as correct as mine.

Just two opinions or dare say observation.

But that's just it.
 
.
Well if the operation order was from the court then the court is right.Without taking the court and the legal system into confidence who the hell these politicians are to involve army and do negotiations on their own?

Court order was to remove the protesters without use of firearms, and the end result achieved by Rangers was just that.

Did the court order prohibit use of Rangers for negotiations?
 
.
May be that was the whole point - to let everyone know who is the undisputed boss, calculating that the Army's reputation will remain above reproach for the majority.

Perhaps also a lesson for the idiots sitting in Islamabad to not cede space for others to fill. One has to realize that with NS out, the entire PML-N government is a no-show. When they leave this vacuum, someone is bound to fill it.

And the reason is obvious too. Army wants the public to know their stance of peaceful settlement of matters so that people like us can counter the blood seeking desi liberal scum spewing venom here and elsewhere.

This approach doesn't damage the reputation of the Army.
This is not how it is supposed to work my friend but many Pakistanis are so accustomed to this idea of Army being the safety net that they think it is normal. It is not the Army's job to stand out and do its own image building. This has to change. The Army needs the tact of other senior leaders it has had in the past including Gens Nawaz, Kakar, Karamat. They all had to contend with this nonsense as well, but they worked behind the scenes. The Army should never be seen overtly waging its influence. I know the situation is as such where people think Army had no choice. In my humble view, they always have other options.
 
.
Perhaps also a lesson for the idiots sitting in Islamabad to not cede space for others to fill. One has to realize that with NS out, the entire PML-N government is a no-show. When they leave this vacuum, someone is bound to fill it.

Of course that is a valid criticism as well, given that there is plenty of culpability all around for everyone several times over. No wonder it is the image of Pakistan that takes a bashing internationally. After all the Army has worked long and hard to develop and maintain its predominance over everyone else. To the victor belong the spoils.
 
.
After all the Army has worked long and hard to develop and maintain its predominance over everyone else. To the victor belong the spoils.
Its the same chicken or the egg debate. Never ending points and counter-points about which side does what to precipitate the other side's response or behavior. I don't blame the Army for everything and where they do overstep their mandate, I call it out. I have already mentioned the points about where the civilian government fails Pakistan.
 
.
Of course that is a valid criticism as well, given that there is plenty of culpability all around for everyone several times over. No wonder it is the image of Pakistan that takes a bashing internationally. After all the Army has worked long and hard to develop and maintain its predominance over everyone else. To the victor belong the spoils.

Pressler taught you well professor.

If noble wanderers like you could make a city last. Troy would still be the jewel of the world. Homer's Iliad would never have been written. No Rome would have been built.
 
.
https://www.ft.com/content/fcc21fe0-d34c-11e7-8c9a-d9c0a5c8d5c9


Pakistan Islamist protests bolster army’s strength
Islamabad siege prompts deal that officials admit has humiliated civilian government
Islamist activists agree to end protest in Pakistan
Farhan Bokhari in Islamabad and Kiran Stacey in New Delhi

Islamist protesters have called a halt to their three-week siege of the Pakistani capital, following a deal that officials admit has humiliated the civilian government and left the army in its strongest position for years. For nearly a month, activists protesting a perceived slight against Islam have blockaded a main road linking Islamabad with neighbouring Rawalpindi, bringing the capital almost to a halt.

After a weekend of violence, the crowds were persuaded to go home on Monday after General Qamar Javed Bajwa, head of the army, intervened to broker a truce with the government. The move underlined how Pakistan’s powerful army, which has run the country for almost half of its 70 years as an independent state, is once more gaining the upper hand over the civilian government.

One retired general told the FT: “It became clear . . . that if anyone was to end this dispute it would have to be the army. The government mishandled this situation. The army finally rescued the prime minister.” A senior government official said: “The government stands defeated, the protesters have won. Now we must consider the consequences for the future of Pakistan.”

The protests started after a reference to the Prophet Mohammed was omitted from a constitutional bill in parliament. The government said the omission — subsequently corrected — was a clerical mistake, but Islamists claimed it was a conspiracy against religious values. What had been a peaceful blockade turned violent over the weekend when riot police firing tear gas clashed with demonstrators, who were armed with sticks and stones. The clashes led to five people being killed, including one policeman, and prompted the government to shut down private television stations and social media platforms.

Gen Bajwa met Pakistan’s prime minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi on Sunday, where according to officials he made it clear that the army would not use force to restore order. Instead, Mr Abbasi agreed to concede to one of the protesters’ main demands by removing law minister Zahid Hamid as well as withdrawing a two-day ban on Pakistani news channels.

By Monday morning, the leaders of the protest had signed a formal agreement to stand down, in which they thanked Gen Bajwa, “whose special efforts helped to put the agreement together and averted a major disaster for the nation”. Another signatory is Major General Faiz Hameed, head of the counter-intelligence division at the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI), further underlining the military’s role in brokering the agreement.

This summer, Nawaz Sharif was ousted as prime minister following a supreme court ruling that he was unable to explain the sources of his wealth and therefore unfit for office. Many close to Mr Sharif saw the army as influential in that decision, pointing to the role of two brigadiers in an investigative panel that reported to the court. Since replacing Mr Sharif, Mr Abbasi has endured a difficult few months both at home, where his finance minister Ishaq Dar has been issued with an arrest warrant, and abroad, with the country’s relationship with the US coming under strain. He has also been criticised for not standing up to Islamist organisations, for example by recently releasing Hafiz Saeed, who has been accused of masterminding the 2008 terror attacks in Mumbai.

Many commentators say Mr Abbasi’s inability to prevent the street protests or stop them once they turned violent further undermined both his and his government’s position. Ikram Sehgal, a commentator on defence and security, said: “The reality is that the government is completely incapable of running Pakistan. How can you expect a government which could not manage a protest to manage Pakistan?”

Meanwhile, some in the business community have started to talk openly of their wish for the government to cede ground to the military. “People in the business community think that with the politicians unable to get their act together, at least there is one relatively solid institution,” said Ehsan Malik, chief executive of the Pakistan Business Council.

Most observers for now discount the possibility of a full military coup, pointing out that the army enjoys considerable power without having to face the scrutiny or international criticism that would come with running the government. "There is no threat of a military takeover in Pakistan,” said Nadeem Malik, a veteran Pakistani journalist. “What happened was that the executive ran away from this situation and there was space which someone had to occupy.” Ehsan Malik added: “The army knows that a direct military government would not be likely to gain acceptance. But Gen Bajwa does not need to be in charge — he can influence policy behind the scenes.”

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2017. All rights reserved.
 
.
IMG_5862.JPG
 
. .
https://www.ft.com/content/fcc21fe0-d34c-11e7-8c9a-d9c0a5c8d5c9


Pakistan Islamist protests bolster army’s strength
Islamabad siege prompts deal that officials admit has humiliated civilian government
Islamist activists agree to end protest in Pakistan
Farhan Bokhari in Islamabad and Kiran Stacey in New Delhi

Islamist protesters have called a halt to their three-week siege of the Pakistani capital, following a deal that officials admit has humiliated the civilian government and left the army in its strongest position for years. For nearly a month, activists protesting a perceived slight against Islam have blockaded a main road linking Islamabad with neighbouring Rawalpindi, bringing the capital almost to a halt.

After a weekend of violence, the crowds were persuaded to go home on Monday after General Qamar Javed Bajwa, head of the army, intervened to broker a truce with the government. The move underlined how Pakistan’s powerful army, which has run the country for almost half of its 70 years as an independent state, is once more gaining the upper hand over the civilian government.

One retired general told the FT: “It became clear . . . that if anyone was to end this dispute it would have to be the army. The government mishandled this situation. The army finally rescued the prime minister.” A senior government official said: “The government stands defeated, the protesters have won. Now we must consider the consequences for the future of Pakistan.”

The protests started after a reference to the Prophet Mohammed was omitted from a constitutional bill in parliament. The government said the omission — subsequently corrected — was a clerical mistake, but Islamists claimed it was a conspiracy against religious values. What had been a peaceful blockade turned violent over the weekend when riot police firing tear gas clashed with demonstrators, who were armed with sticks and stones. The clashes led to five people being killed, including one policeman, and prompted the government to shut down private television stations and social media platforms.

Gen Bajwa met Pakistan’s prime minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi on Sunday, where according to officials he made it clear that the army would not use force to restore order. Instead, Mr Abbasi agreed to concede to one of the protesters’ main demands by removing law minister Zahid Hamid as well as withdrawing a two-day ban on Pakistani news channels.

By Monday morning, the leaders of the protest had signed a formal agreement to stand down, in which they thanked Gen Bajwa, “whose special efforts helped to put the agreement together and averted a major disaster for the nation”. Another signatory is Major General Faiz Hameed, head of the counter-intelligence division at the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI), further underlining the military’s role in brokering the agreement.

This summer, Nawaz Sharif was ousted as prime minister following a supreme court ruling that he was unable to explain the sources of his wealth and therefore unfit for office. Many close to Mr Sharif saw the army as influential in that decision, pointing to the role of two brigadiers in an investigative panel that reported to the court. Since replacing Mr Sharif, Mr Abbasi has endured a difficult few months both at home, where his finance minister Ishaq Dar has been issued with an arrest warrant, and abroad, with the country’s relationship with the US coming under strain. He has also been criticised for not standing up to Islamist organisations, for example by recently releasing Hafiz Saeed, who has been accused of masterminding the 2008 terror attacks in Mumbai.

Many commentators say Mr Abbasi’s inability to prevent the street protests or stop them once they turned violent further undermined both his and his government’s position. Ikram Sehgal, a commentator on defence and security, said: “The reality is that the government is completely incapable of running Pakistan. How can you expect a government which could not manage a protest to manage Pakistan?”

Meanwhile, some in the business community have started to talk openly of their wish for the government to cede ground to the military. “People in the business community think that with the politicians unable to get their act together, at least there is one relatively solid institution,” said Ehsan Malik, chief executive of the Pakistan Business Council.

Most observers for now discount the possibility of a full military coup, pointing out that the army enjoys considerable power without having to face the scrutiny or international criticism that would come with running the government. "There is no threat of a military takeover in Pakistan,” said Nadeem Malik, a veteran Pakistani journalist. “What happened was that the executive ran away from this situation and there was space which someone had to occupy.” Ehsan Malik added: “The army knows that a direct military government would not be likely to gain acceptance. But Gen Bajwa does not need to be in charge — he can influence policy behind the scenes.”

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2017. All rights reserved.

The civilian government made its self look like a fool more than the army did. Saying things like "I'll sort them out" "they'll be chased away in 3 hours" "I'm the defence minister of Pakistan not faizabad" and in the end miserably failed and had to end up licking the army's boots. On top of that various ministers resigning and many ready to resign.
 
.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom