Shashi Tharur Pakistan Army Won't Make Peace With India
- Thread starter Manas
- Start date
muhammadali233
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2015
- Messages
- 957
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Pakistan army with India?Wtf.
Why would they?It is govt job not Armies.
Viewer Discretion advice: This video might lower your IQ.
Why would they?It is govt job not Armies.
Viewer Discretion advice: This video might lower your IQ.
AZADPAKISTAN2009
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2009
- Messages
- 37,669
- Reaction score
- 68
- Country
- Location
Don't expect cookies from our Citizens as well while RAW agents are being caught in buckets
aakash_2410
BANNED
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2010
- Messages
- 2,249
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
And i thought "Shashi" would be a female!!
even the tharur was not enough to create any doubts, i was so confident about shashi.
Shashi is a unisex name buddy. Shashi = Moon in Punjabi?
But, obviously if you're not Punjabi then you wouldn't know. Sorry for assuming.
Turingsage
BANNED
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2014
- Messages
- 2,304
- Reaction score
- -23
- Country
- Location
Military march
OWEN BENNETT-JONES — PUBLISHED ABOUT 11 HOURS AGO
The writer is a British journalist and author of Pakistan: Eye of the Storm.
A BRITISH politician, Enoch Powell, once remarked that all political careers end in failure. Richard Nixon may have reached the White House but later, as he looked back on his life, his reputation lay in ruins. Margaret Thatcher may have vanquished all her opponents but eventually they forced her out. Powell was right in part because the politicians’ promises are always so lavish they can never be kept.
Gen Musharraf was bound to fail the moment he promised to rid the country of corrupt politicians and to introduce ‘true’ democracy instead — whatever that is. He was vowing to accomplish more than he could deliver. And when, inevitably, he failed, the people wanted him to go. And even if Gen Musharraf has found it difficult to accept the popular verdict, the army learnt that those who hold power are held responsible for what happens.
Having taken that lesson on board, the post-Musharraf military adopted a new, subtler tactic. It decided to exercise power in all crucial areas while simultaneously allowing civilian rulers to hold office. Traditionally, the policy areas reserved for the army included the nuclear weapons programme and relations with the key foreign powers: India, Afghanistan and the United States. In the last few years, the list has expanded considerably. The establishment of apex committees, military courts and the military’s use of coercion to force the media onto the back foot means there is scarcely an area of public policy that the army is not seeking to influence or control.
You might think that it is an approach that has few downsides for the military. While they make the decisions, the civilians absorb the unpopularity that comes with the failure to deliver.
But there is a problem. The taste for power is insatiable. Its acquisition leads to the desire for more. It’s all a question of trends. The relationship between the civilians and the army is not static. Either the army is in the ascendant or the civilians are. It is not a stable situation in which the status quo can be sustained over a long period of time.
The taste for power is insatiable. Its acquisition leads to the desire for more.
There are always so many reasons for the military to persuade itself that it needs more power. Take the media. From the army’s point of view, Pakistan’s journalists should produce articles that show the country in a good light. And they should never criticise the army.
Journalists who challenge authority and focus attention on difficult social issues are being negative and unpatriotic. And yet despite all the pressure from the army some writers persist in delivering ‘negative’ articles. And for some in the security establishment that is intolerable.
And then there are the corrupt politicians. As far as the army is concerned the old deal, whereby the politicians gave in to every military budget request and in return were allowed to fill their boots with loot, should no longer apply. The army wants to change the terms of that deal so that the politicians continue to give in to military demands but stop making the money.
Which brings us to Nawaz Sharif’s hospital bed in West London. Before the prime minister’s medical crisis the military’s calculation went like this: if Raheel Sharif does not get an extension then the gains made under his tenure might be lost. Without his personal authority to keep the government in check, it could be a case of back to business as usual with corrupt politicians providing weak, ineffective central government and the army’s power on a downward trend.
And the situation, as the army sees it, is urgent because over the next few months Raheel Sharif will inevitably became weaker. Whether it is President Obama, David Cameron or Gen Sharif, it is an iron rule of politics that outgoing leaders become lame ducks. Their power slips away the moment colleagues and rivals start looking ahead to what will happen after the leader has gone. And again, in the Pakistani context, that would set trends over the next few months that the army would find hard to tolerate.
It is possible that Nawaz Sharif’s medical difficulties could help calm the situation down. What more could the army ask for than a physically weakened prime minister? But there is another way of looking at it.
As each civilian government reaches its mid term the generals start casting around for a mechanism by which they can remove it. In the past the president would have been prevailed upon to force the prime minister out. With that option not available it has not been clear how the army should go about the business of removing Nawaz Sharif and putting someone more amenable in his place.
Until he became ill, that is. Because what easier argument could there be than it is inappropriate to have Pakistan governed from a sick bed?
The writer is a British journalist and author of Pakistan: Eye of the Storm.
Published in Dawn, June 2nd, 2016
http://www.dawn.com/news/1262101/military-march
OWEN BENNETT-JONES — PUBLISHED ABOUT 11 HOURS AGO
The writer is a British journalist and author of Pakistan: Eye of the Storm.
A BRITISH politician, Enoch Powell, once remarked that all political careers end in failure. Richard Nixon may have reached the White House but later, as he looked back on his life, his reputation lay in ruins. Margaret Thatcher may have vanquished all her opponents but eventually they forced her out. Powell was right in part because the politicians’ promises are always so lavish they can never be kept.
Gen Musharraf was bound to fail the moment he promised to rid the country of corrupt politicians and to introduce ‘true’ democracy instead — whatever that is. He was vowing to accomplish more than he could deliver. And when, inevitably, he failed, the people wanted him to go. And even if Gen Musharraf has found it difficult to accept the popular verdict, the army learnt that those who hold power are held responsible for what happens.
Having taken that lesson on board, the post-Musharraf military adopted a new, subtler tactic. It decided to exercise power in all crucial areas while simultaneously allowing civilian rulers to hold office. Traditionally, the policy areas reserved for the army included the nuclear weapons programme and relations with the key foreign powers: India, Afghanistan and the United States. In the last few years, the list has expanded considerably. The establishment of apex committees, military courts and the military’s use of coercion to force the media onto the back foot means there is scarcely an area of public policy that the army is not seeking to influence or control.
You might think that it is an approach that has few downsides for the military. While they make the decisions, the civilians absorb the unpopularity that comes with the failure to deliver.
But there is a problem. The taste for power is insatiable. Its acquisition leads to the desire for more. It’s all a question of trends. The relationship between the civilians and the army is not static. Either the army is in the ascendant or the civilians are. It is not a stable situation in which the status quo can be sustained over a long period of time.
The taste for power is insatiable. Its acquisition leads to the desire for more.
There are always so many reasons for the military to persuade itself that it needs more power. Take the media. From the army’s point of view, Pakistan’s journalists should produce articles that show the country in a good light. And they should never criticise the army.
Journalists who challenge authority and focus attention on difficult social issues are being negative and unpatriotic. And yet despite all the pressure from the army some writers persist in delivering ‘negative’ articles. And for some in the security establishment that is intolerable.
And then there are the corrupt politicians. As far as the army is concerned the old deal, whereby the politicians gave in to every military budget request and in return were allowed to fill their boots with loot, should no longer apply. The army wants to change the terms of that deal so that the politicians continue to give in to military demands but stop making the money.
Which brings us to Nawaz Sharif’s hospital bed in West London. Before the prime minister’s medical crisis the military’s calculation went like this: if Raheel Sharif does not get an extension then the gains made under his tenure might be lost. Without his personal authority to keep the government in check, it could be a case of back to business as usual with corrupt politicians providing weak, ineffective central government and the army’s power on a downward trend.
And the situation, as the army sees it, is urgent because over the next few months Raheel Sharif will inevitably became weaker. Whether it is President Obama, David Cameron or Gen Sharif, it is an iron rule of politics that outgoing leaders become lame ducks. Their power slips away the moment colleagues and rivals start looking ahead to what will happen after the leader has gone. And again, in the Pakistani context, that would set trends over the next few months that the army would find hard to tolerate.
It is possible that Nawaz Sharif’s medical difficulties could help calm the situation down. What more could the army ask for than a physically weakened prime minister? But there is another way of looking at it.
As each civilian government reaches its mid term the generals start casting around for a mechanism by which they can remove it. In the past the president would have been prevailed upon to force the prime minister out. With that option not available it has not been clear how the army should go about the business of removing Nawaz Sharif and putting someone more amenable in his place.
Until he became ill, that is. Because what easier argument could there be than it is inappropriate to have Pakistan governed from a sick bed?
The writer is a British journalist and author of Pakistan: Eye of the Storm.
Published in Dawn, June 2nd, 2016
http://www.dawn.com/news/1262101/military-march
Arsalan
THINK TANK CHAIRMAN
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2008
- Messages
- 18,178
- Reaction score
- 65
- Country
- Location
I am a Punjabi bahi,, dont know what this Shashi is however, never heard any Punjabi saying that.
Anyway, thanks for clearing!!
graphican
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2009
- Messages
- 12,433
- Reaction score
- 48
- Country
- Location
Indian can dream that Pakistan should forget Kashmir and be friends forgetting Indian acts of 71 and recent terrorism they backed in Pakistan. Dream on.. No matter how much alo piaz you buy or sell, Pakistan is steady on its commitment to resolve Kashmir dispute upto satisfaction of Kashmiris.
Muhammad Omar
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2014
- Messages
- 13,558
- Reaction score
- 15
- Country
- Location
SarthakGanguly
BANNED
- Joined
- May 10, 2013
- Messages
- 18,416
- Reaction score
- 7
- Country
- Location
Forget Pakistan. No Muslim nation in the position of Pakistan can never make peace with India.
nana41
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2007
- Messages
- 1,070
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Shashi is a Punjabi word........eh kithon dee punjabi ae " chan"jee?
aakash_2410
BANNED
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2010
- Messages
- 2,249
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
I am a Punjabi bahi,, dont know what this Shashi is however, never heard any Punjabi saying that.
Anyway, thanks for clearing!!
Ki paaji? Shashi Kapoor? Itne wadde famous Punjabi da naam nhi suneya? Assi vi use nhi karde par yeah it's of Punjabi origin apparently.
Arsalan
THINK TANK CHAIRMAN
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2008
- Messages
- 18,178
- Reaction score
- 65
- Country
- Location
I searched, its Hindi i guess.
Not Punjabi for sure bro
Why is that so?
aakash_2410
BANNED
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2010
- Messages
- 2,249
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
I searched, its Hindi i guess.
Not Punjabi for sure bro
I dunno man this says it's of Punjabi origin. But, most websites say it's of Sanskrit origin. Hence, has the same meaning in all the North Indian language.
http://babynames.merschat.com/name-meaning.cgi?bn_key=31243
Waisay bhi naam wichh ki rakha aa?
Similar threads
