National memories are short. When knocking the political classes, it is not only the civilians who play politics; we have had our share of military politicians. The various hues of leaderships down the years have played havoc with what was, and what is, Pakistan. In and out of khaki, they have all started off as the most popular character on the stage, from Ayub Khan downwards. Remember how he was ‘welcomed’ in, and then how things caught up with him, delivery failed, staying power ran out with a run of national disasters, and the inevitable corruption surfaced to the fore.
Yahya Khan was not exactly ‘welcomed’ in but he was far from shunned — and if one talks to old bureaucrats they will admit that during his short stay he did manage to do some good — until, again, his personal failings led him into all sorts of troubles, to his manipulation by the then politicians, uniformed and otherwise, and to the loss of half the country. He died a poor man, probably the last of the leaders not to have robbed the nation.
So Zulfikar Ali Bhutto was ‘welcomed’ in, in a manner subdued given the circumstances. His excesses led to the ‘welcoming’ in of Ziaul Haq, who ‘saved’ the nation from turmoil only to impose a far more dangerous form of moral turmoil that lives on, in healthy mode, to this day.
The yo-yoing couple of the 1990s, Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, were ‘welcomed’ in warmly each time they came in and their oustings were taken by all as good riddance. The coming of Pervez Musharraf was hailed and ‘welcomed’ with what is nationally known as zeal and fervour. His rather odious mixture of military and civilian politicians and politics led him to the commitment of unforgivable blunders and an ignominious exit. But his legacy lives with us, the party of the people received its due ‘welcome’ in 2008 after Musharraf and his deals had given us the NRO and Asif Zardari.
So here we all are, bereft of leadership as has been the case apart from short sharp sprints when those ‘welcomed’ in have arrived but not settled — once they settle in, say goodbye to any form of governance or hope. We have nothing actually on the ground in the leadership seats, nobody in sharp suits or beribboned uniforms to whom it is possible to loop up. The main man in khaki politicised himself when heading the ISI as he played the role of chief negotiator of the NRO and his totally irresponsible act of taking on an extension to his tenure, whether at the behest of the US or not, has considerably lessened his standing. And the main man out of khaki — well, does anything more have to be said about him?
The army rule this country through custom — they have always had the upper hand, rich, powerful and united. It all started a long time ago in 1954, when an army chief was installed by a civilian cabinet as the defence minister. Old habits die hard.
Now we have Imran Khan, ‘welcomed’ and hogging the media with a vengeance, having been out in the cold far too long. Politics is far from cricket and to take at face value his intentions towards the army and its brother-in-arms, the ISI, well, without their backing he is unlikely to go far. They have been in the game far too long, making and unmaking. Remember ZAB — he set up the political wing of the ISI, which ultimately did him in by its over-action in the 1977 elections and led him to his downfall.
Published in The Express Tribune, November 19th, 2011.
COMMENTS (14)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
@antanu g: in almost every comment you insist, 'i am an india too'. but funny part is that, you have no clue what india is about. now enlighten me, which textbook(s) is written by rss and where it is available. i did all my education from india.
i am not saying you are a pakistani, but i am very much sure you are NOT an indian.
@antanu g: i never asked where you are from and don't care too...
but don't fall for the RSS - bashing trap - they are too small to matter. Their text books - may be followed in some obscure 'shakhas' in some bylane 'galli' of Pune or Dadar - and that too - will not help the reader clear any Indian exam - in fact will fail miserably even class 10 exams!! So how many people actually read these - 50,000 - 100,000? I doubt even membership of RSS touches that figure!!! India is a 1.1 billion country - for your benefit - it is - 1,100,000,000 everyone of whom have to read secular textbooks. Hope this puts things in perspective.
@antanu g: to Arindom "RSS generated textbooks are equaly bad and teaching all those things which Pakistani books are teaching to their subjects." Would you tell us where are those"RSS generated textbooks" sold? Would you name a few of those books and their authors and the content that you found in those to be similar to that in "Pakistani books"? And also, which schools prescribe them? You are an impostor alright because you know nothing about India's educational system. Perhaps natural, because you don't seem to be able to write even one correct sentence.
@antanu g: - sir part and parcel of a journalist's job is to point out these imbalances however obvious they may be - preferably in a way that is more palatable than most . journlists should refrain from being an organ of the powers that be but rather frmo the point of view of the populace ... finding solutions is the jobo f the powers that be , after all they are paid rather well to do just that ?
Strange logic, where the major blame comes down to civilian rule. may be time to move to Syria, at least they kill those who disagree or protest. Pakistan is too good comparatively.
Madam,
OBVIOUSLY IK can only win with "supprot" from the only quarter that matters. Why are you putting it so tentatively?
Otherwise, great article. I think it is shameful how we have "welcomed" military takeovers. Does it surprise that they have such an exaggerated sense of self-importance?
I agree with Mirza that this article includes army as well. But with a pinch of salt when she says: It all started a long time ago in 1954, when an army chief was installed by a civilian cabinet as the defense minister. So civilians are at fault after all. But wait, in 1954, the civilians who gave a job to Ayub Khan were not really 'elected' civilians. I say the worst democratic government is still better than the army rule. Full stop. I can't change the author's mind, but she has failed miserably in arguments to change ours, which are one sided. Democracy allows that. So we show patience. Carry on regardless.
Spot on. There seems nothing much can or will be done to disrupt the system.
Great article mam. I always am amazed how Pakistani public reacts to new governments. The old guy is just dead and finished and the new one is saviour.
Hope Imran is the last saviour. From what I read about him he will be ZIA-UL-HAQ 2.
I must say that I am in agreement with the author for the first time. It is the first balanced article in which she has not just condemned the elected govt only. I have been saying like a broken record that we as a poor country have a problem with the richest army in the world. The democratic institutions are never allowed to set up and progress. The mullah/military alliance supported by the terrorists is the biggest corruption that is eating Pakistan like a cancer.
why blame the leaders - people get leadership they deserve - as the saying goes. The people never demand governance, education, development, transparency, withdrawal of military from policy-making, cleaning of corruption, etc.. Instead, the people are busy in far-off 'ummah' issues, blasphemy issues, conspiracy theories, "bums", and crush-India projects...