While US policymakers, generals, diplomats and spies must be taking note of all these statements, it is the personal assurances from our military commander that interested them the most. We know already that unlike his predecessors, General Sharif has put in place a more successful military strategy to deal with terrorism — a strategy liked and appreciated by the Americans. Rarely would the Americans want anything from us that would differ from their interests and their aims. So, for General Sharif to stand on American soil and say, “Zarb-e-Azb is not just a military offensive but is a concept to defeat terrorism in all its forms and manifestations. The anti-terror campaign is not restricted to Waziristan and Khyber tribal areas but covers the whole country” must have pleased and overjoyed his hosts.
Militaries of both countries have been engaged in fighting the war on terror for years now. One common lesson that both militaries should have learnt by now is that a military victory only comes by controlling the politics of the situation. Of the US military actions in Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya, only the one in Kosovo can be termed a success and that is because the control of politics played a huge role there.
Military objectives, no matter how well defined and purposeful, will remain narrow if the political ends are continued to be ignored. A failing military strategy, if re-evaluated, can be turned into a success. This has been proved by General Sharif himself. But to complement the military efforts, the civilians have to take over the control of the affected areas and fill the political vacuum with a determined effort.
General Sharif visited the US Central Command Headquarters in Florida. He met US senators, General Lloyd Austin, the chief of the US central command, National Security Adviser Susan Rice, Deputy Secretary of Defence Bob Work, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey, and US Special Representative for Pakistan and Afghanistan Dan Feldman. All these were high-profile engagements with the US national security team and policymakers. The Americans are smart. They know there is no military commander who will ever say that he is not making progress in his area of operation. No military commander when invited to the US is ever expected to say that the situation is getting worse. Given the resources, it is in the nature of any military commander — with General Sharif being no exception — to say that ‘all challenges will be overcome’. Pakistan has a military history in which few senior military officers have emerged from wars with their reputation improved or intact — General Niazi, General Yahya Khan, General Tikka Khan (1971 war), General (retd) Musharraf (Kargil) and General (retd) Ashfaq Parvez Kayani (war on terror). So, for General Sharif the challenge is huge. At the level of the military institution, it is most likely that he may have carried two important lessons from the US. One, in recent US military history, General David Petraeus is referred to as the most successful American general. But he did not attend the war college for his mid-career studies. He instead got his PhD from Princeton University. His ‘strategic intelligence’, more than his ‘operational excellence’ contributed to the military success that the US enjoyed in Iraq. Though Iraq is again demonstrating the degree of violence that it suffered before 2008, the military success that General Petraeus achieved is well recognised and documented. The point I am making is that in our system of promotion in the military, attending war courses is an absolute essential without which an officer cannot become a general. However, like the US, we also need ‘strategic intelligence’ to be part of our military thinking. This should go a long way in combating the ‘system of conformity’ and ‘can do’ culture in which senior officers end up doing mostly what their predecessors had done.
Secondly, Pentagon has introduced a school dedicated to governance — the US Army John F Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School at Fort Bragg, North Carolina. The creation of such a school by our military may also bring rich dividends. In a civil-military joint venture, the knowledge, skill and experience gained at such a facility may prepare a civil-military force that can not only create a competent and sound administrative structure in our ungovernable tribal areas, but also eventually create the right circumstances for the exit of our military from that region.
General Sharif, during his visit, was conferred with the US Legion of Merit Medal “in recognition of his brave leadership and efforts to ensure peace in the region”. It is hoped that the entire nation will stand behind its military commander for him to achieve this mission.
Published in The Express Tribune, December 9th, 2014.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
COMMENTS (9)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
1725443747-0/Untitled-design-(5)1725443747-0-165x106.webp "article")
@Naeem Khan: They were not supposed to take off the shoes but the senior Generals voluntarily did this act out of respect for the great leader of the free world.
Rex Minor
During his recent trip to the United States, General Raheel Sharif visited the US CENTCOM headquarters in Tampa and held meetings with the Central Command’s leadership. He then flew to Washington DC and held meetings with the Deputy Defense Secretary, Robert Work, the Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey, and the Chief of Staff of the Army, General Ray Odierno. He also held meetings with US Senators and other government officials. During his trip General Sharif visited Fort Irwin National Training Center in California where he reviewed the professional training of troops and use of advanced equipment of warfare. The General also met senior military officials and trainers. In Washington he also held meetings with the National Security Advisor, Susan Rice and United States Secretary of State, John Kerry.
Pentagon Spokesman Rear Adm. John Kirby provided the following readout: “The leaders discussed regional security issues and their commitment to an enduring partnership. They also emphasized the importance of sustained and substantive dialogue as we continue to develop the bilateral military-to-military relationship.” General Sharif in his address at the Pakistan Embassy dinner, before returning to Pakistan, said, “Relations with the United States were also on an upward trajectory.” He also said that he had very good meetings with his counterparts on boosting military-to-military ties.
It is important for both nations’ leadership to meet on regular intervals. We have always maintained that Pakistan is an important country in the region and that continued dialogue helps in bringing both nations closer. These meetings also help in maintaining positive bilateral relationship.
Abdul Quddus DET - U.S. Central Command
A great deal of this article is just a rehash of articles that appeared in the latest issue of Foreign Affais, evaluating the lessons learned by the US military in Iraq and Afghanistan. However, the lessons for the US and Pakistan are quite different. The US will always intervene in foreign countries and eventiually leave, irrespective of whether its objectives are met or not. For Pakistan, it does not have the luxury to leave because the issues and problems are on its soil and neighborhood. Pakistan's lessons must be that it should exert total control over its territory, and not allow groups or individual to germinate that use violence, or the threat of violence, to afflict destruction on its citizens. If it means going after political gangs and their politician mentors, Pakistan must do so. If it means closing down madrassas, it must do so. Is Pakistan courageous enough to apply these lessons?
One should not forget that US policy makers prefer military than civilian rule, they rather not deal with hundreds of elected representatives of the people but one strong man at the helm. Look at all the developing countries around the world where Americans interfered and installed military dictators, the departure of an elected President Morsey of Egypt is the latest wish list of the Americans. Red carpet treatment of General Sharif has some connotations, they just don't do things for protocol purposes, they have some thing in their minds. Remember how some of the Pakistani senior generals were treated at Kennedy Air Port, they had to carry their shoes like the rest of the passenger and that treatment incensed them because they thought they were invited by the senior generals at central command headquarters at Florida and should not have been treated like the common passengers. Let us hope that the red carpet treatment and receiving US Legion of Merit Medal Award does not go to his head and keep Pakistan's interests in the forefront of what ever was discussed and promised.
Our army understands domestic and international affairs more than civilian leaders or organization. It also knows what is best for us. During Musharaf regime, we were told that playing double game is good for the country. In Kayani era, fueling anti American sentiments, attack on NATO supplies and continuous delay of military action were our best interests. We are sure present military actions without distinction of good and bad Taliban and "From America with love" type policies are also in our best interest.
It will be great favour to let the elected civilian Govt run the foreign policy. We have not seen any change in the foreign policy with regard to the region. Zarb Azb could go as long as relocating the Haqqanis & other terror groups except for smashing of Miramshah & Mir Ali bazars. If that is what US wants as well, then, they are proving Karzai right all along.
It is the same modus operandi as in the past. Do what is important to the U.S. and unleash "strategic assets" on India. US will be marginally entertained and India kept on the boil. What else is new?!
What the Colonel wrote would be amusing if it was not so tragic. The US and its puppets have been creating problems around the world ever since WW2, but have gone into overdrive over the last 20 years or so. What we have now is complete disruption which stretches from Africa to the Sub-Continent, and countless potential opposition fighters, referred to as terrorists, are being created by the day. The US was not happy with Pakistan, but they now have General Sharif who is doing everything they want, and is creating huge future problems for Pakistan as the Taliban and other groups disperse around the country. Like most other people I would like to think our leaders from Pakistan, the US, UK, NATO, EU, Australia know what they are doing, but if the debacle of the last 20 years are any example it would appear that we are thinking in vain. Also, as if the mischief the US has been propagating to date has not been bad enough they appear to be wanting to start a war with Russia, and that will make what has happened so far appear to be penny-ante stuff. Standing by Pakistan's military commander means standing by the US and America is leading us further and further down the rabbit hole.
starting with trying Musharraf in treason case, army by his soft and hard power,rendered govt to surrender security and foreign policy to him, in return just "not to coup"