Nawaz Sharif was also a 'selected' Prime Minister, says Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari

[Abdullah719]

PPP Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari on Saturday said prior to Prime Minister Imran Khan, PML-N supreme leader and former premier Nawaz Sharif too was “selected” for the job, a statement that is likely to further drive the wedge between the two opposition parties.

“Just like the PTI, the PML-N also did not respect parliament,” the scion of the Bhutto dynasty told reporters in Lahore.

“Whenever the people of Punjab have needed it, the PML-N leadership has disappeared.”
Responding to a question about his party’s modest strength of seven MPAs in Punjab, he said slain PPP chairperson and former premier Benazir Bhutto with only 17 votes had prevented Nawaz, who had the majority in the house, from becoming the “Amir-ul-Momineen”.

He further more said that his party’s Murad Ali Shah was a better chief minister than PML-N President Shehbaz Sharif.

The PPP chairman said the PTI was “handed over” the government under a “contract”.

“As they are on a contract, they are only fulfilling the obligations. Such a government doesn’t have any autonomy or authority.”

Bilawal further maintained that the current PTI-led government will would be sent packing in six months as their contract period had expired.

Taking a jibe at the government over its policies, the PPP chairman said all the crises that had engulfed the country during military ruler Gen (retd) Pervez Musharraf’s time had started to surface again. “When the summer comes, there will be power outages again coupled with inflated electricity’s bills.”

Later in the day, Punjab Information Minister Fayyazul Hassan Chohan took a broadside at the PPP chairman, saying that by speaking in English Bilawal wanted to dupe the international community into believing that his party was the only voice for secularism and tolerance whereas it was only a façade to hide its heinous crimes.

“In the last 12 years of their rule in Sindh, thousands of people have been killed.”

The minister also claimed that journalist Aziz Memon was murdered for exposing the failure of Bilawal’s train march.

“Bilawal Bhutto Zardari should be investigated for the journalist’s killing,” he demanded.

Chohan urged international human rights organisations to visit Sindh and to witness the rule of tyranny in the province.

He sarcastically said Larkana had been handed over to rabid dogs which were biting the hands that fed them.

“There is a cure for people who are bit by rabid dogs, but not for those bit by raid leaders.”

https://tribune.com.pk/story/2162480/1-prior-pm-imran-nawaz-also-selected-claims-bilawal/

 

[Abdullah719]

Sharifs have protested to Zardari over Bilawal’s remarks: PML-N

LAHORE: ‘Displeasure’ has been conveyed to the Pakistan Peoples Party co-chairman Asif Ali Zardari from the Sharifs over his son’s “uncalled for remarks” against them.

“The Sharifs — former prime minister Nawaz Sharif and PML-N president Shahbaz Sharif — did not like the comments of PPP chairman Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari and conveyed their displeasure to the party’s [PPP] top leadership,” a senior PML-N leader told Dawn on Sunday.

Mr Bhutto-Zardari had on Saturday declared that like Imran Khan, PML-N supremo Nawaz Sharif had also been ‘selected’ [by the establishment] for the post of premier. “Before Imran Khan, Nawaz Sharif was a selected premier. Benazir Bhutto did not allow Mr Sharif to become Ameerul Momineen (emir of Muslims) and led a vibrant opposition with just 17 members in the National Assembly (in 1997),” the PPP leader said and also chided Leader of the Opposition in the National Assembly Shahbaz Sharif for his long absence from parliament. “Like the ruling Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf, the PML-N also does not give importance to parliament.”

The PML-N leader said that after the ‘displeasure’ expressed by the Sharifs it was expected that there would be no more ‘friendly firework’ from Mr Bhutto-Zardari. “Our party leadership has strictly directed us not to respond as we have to go together against the PTI government,” he added.

PML-N Punjab information secretary Azma Bokhari told Dawn that Mr Bhutto-Zardari should talk about future as there was no point in indulging in recriminations. “The history of the PPP and other parties is before everyone. We want the PPP to focus on the poor performance of the PTI regime that has made the lives of the masses miserable through price hike, inflation, unemployment, etc, and should not do a thing that hurts the common cause of the opposition,” she said.

PPP senior leader and Punjab secretary general Chaudhry Manzor told Dawn that the party chairman explained the fact when he was asked [by a journalist] whether Nawaz Sharif was a selected prime minister like incumbent Imran Khan. “What Mr Bilawal’s answer could have been... since the answer is very much obvious based on facts,” he maintained.

When told that Mr Bhutto-Zardari’s anti-Sharifs tirade might hurt the unity of the opposition, Mr Chaudhry said: “I do not think so. Our party has its own politics and others have theirs. The opposition parties are agreed only on one point and that is getting rid of the Imran Khan government. No alliance of the opposition has been formed either to oust Imran Khan through in-house change or launching a protest campaign against inflation together.”

What made Bilawal to take on Sharifs

Some PML-N leaders are of the view that Mr Bhutto-Zardari has been advised by some PPP leaders close to him that if he wants to revive the party in Punjab he will have to take on the Sharifs. “Since there is no immediate requirement of both parties to cooperate with each other for a common cause like in-house change, Bhutto-Zardari set his guns on the Sharifs along with Imran Khan and PTI to gain political mileage,” a PML-N insider said.

He said the PPP leader knew that since the Imran Khan-led government had been given more time by the ‘selector’, he was doing “aggressive politics” in Punjab, showing no care to its natural ally [PML-N] at the moment in the face of common challenge of sending the PTI government home.

“At the moment we want the selector [a reference to the establishment] to stop supporting the PTI regime and give a level playing field to other parties.

“Although the selector has given a few more months to Imran Khan to deliver, we have conveyed to it that the PML-N wants only mid-term polls and nothing short of it,” he said.

Nawaz Sharif has been undergoing medical treatment in London since November last year, while Shahbaz Sharif is there to look after the former. Sources believe that Shahbaz Sharif will return to the country only after ‘some arrangement’ is made to oust the PTI government.

A PPP leader said there was no need to read too much into Mr Bhutto-Zardari’s remarks about the Sharifs which were facts narrated in reference to the context.

https://www.dawn.com/news/1536321/sharifs-have-protested-to-zardari-over-bilawals-remarks-pml-n

 

[Bewal Express]

This is getting interesting- 2 groups of crooks complaining to each other about who the bigger set of crooks is. It shows Billos frustration at the Sharifs after the NS met some big "wig" whilst at the same time being at " deaths door" in London.

 

[aukhan]

This is getting interesting- 2 groups of crooks complaining to each other about who the bigger set of crooks is. It shows Billos frustration at the Sharifs after the NS met some big "wig" whilst at the same time being at " deaths door" in London.

3 groups of crooks. You are forgetting the selectors who are solely responsible for all this mess in the first place.

 

[Bewal Express]

3 groups of crooks. You are forgetting the selectors who are solely responsible for all this mess in the first place.

The selectors have made massive mistakes in the past but at least they are the ones that quite literally put their necks on the line. These crooks have never made a single sacrifice in their lives, all they have ever done is to steal the billions that have been borrowed from abroad.

 

[Rinnegan Sasuke]

The selectors have made massive mistakes in the past but at least they are the ones that quite literally put their necks on the line. These crooks have never made a single sacrifice in their lives, all they have ever done is to steal the billions that have been borrowed from abroad.

Accountability should be for all, including the unconstitutional selectors.

 

[Slim]

3 groups of crooks. You are forgetting the selectors who are solely responsible for all this mess in the first place.

Group of 4, PTI is also a party full of crooks. IK is not running the govt alone, his cabinet is filled with thieves like Khusru Bakhtiar etc.
Not to forget Jahangir Tareen.

 

[Bewal Express]

Accountability should be for all, including the unconstitutional selectors.

Well Ayub Selected ZAB, Zia selected NS and both are dead. Who else do you want prosecuted?

 

[Bewal Express]

Group of 4, PTI is also a party full of crooks. IK is not running the govt alone, his cabinet is filled with thieves like Khusru Bakhtiar etc.
Not to forget Jahangir Tareen.

The PTI is not perfect but if the evidence against JT existed(other than the trust deed affair) then why didnt NS and AZ prosecute him. They chose the NAB chairman, so why didnt he take action. The big difference between the parties is and always will be is that both the Nooras and Billo party have only one mission and that is to loot. Can you name a single member of either party that is not a crook?

 

[IMMY69]

Billy still not behind bars?

 

[Syed1]

The PTI is not perfect but if the evidence against JT existed(other than the trust deed affair) then why didnt NS and AZ prosecute him. They chose the NAB chairman, so why didnt he take action. The big difference between the parties is and always will be is that both the Nooras and Billo party have only one mission and that is to loot. Can you name a single member of either party that is not a crook?

Can't believe certain patwaris equate JKT or Khusro Bakhtiar with Nawaz Sharif or Asif Zardari. JKT or KB were rich BEFORE they joined politics, while Asif Zardari used to sell black tickets outside cinemas and Nawaz Sharif was son of a steel mill owner that wasn't setting the market on fire. Now both AZ and NS have billions of dollars to their name AFTER joining politics. Takes a special kind of paindu to equate AZ/NS with JKT/KB.


Also people keep saying JKT is sugar mafia, well he has just 6-7 sugar mills to his name. While Asif Zardari has 14 and 16 more owned by Omni group (his front company). The Sharifs have 20+ sugar mills that they directly own under their own name and plenty more through front companies.


No wonder Pakistan is the way it is when even seemingly educated people still support the corrupt filth that are NS and AZ. These corrupt politicians deserve to sent infront of a firing squad for subjecting millions to abject poverty while they were building wealth abroad.

 

[WhenSultansBowled]

So the alliance is getting broken, eh Billo?

Can't wait for the day when Bilawal all his people who have stolen food off the poor are in a jail cell.

 

[Bewal Express]

Can't believe certain patwaris equate JKT or Khusro Bakhtiar with Nawaz Sharif or Asif Zardari. JKT or KB were rich BEFORE they joined politics, while Asif Zardari used to sell black tickets outside cinemas and Nawaz Sharif was son of a steel mill owner that wasn't setting the market on fire. Now both AZ and NS have billions of dollars to their name AFTER joining politics. Takes a special kind of paindu to equate AZ/NS with JKT/KB.


Also people keep saying JKT is sugar mafia, well he has just 6-7 sugar mills to his name. While Asif Zardari has 14 and 16 more owned by Omni group (his front company). The Sharifs have 20+ sugar mills that they directly own under their own name and plenty more through front companies.


No wonder Pakistan is the way it is when even seemingly educated people still support the corrupt filth that are NS and AZ. These corrupt politicians deserve to sent infront of a firing squad for subjecting millions to abject poverty while they were building wealth abroad.

As soon as they are challenged, they run away. The funny thing is that Billo party and the Nooras have been on the same page since IK came to power and their supporters were all supporting each other and then Billo let's the cat out of the bag. Let's see these losers use verbal gymnastics to avoid the elephant in the room after what Billo said.

 

[Ronaldo7]

The real "selected" was his grandfather who forcefully became the PM of Pakistan when Mujib-ur-Rahman had won the most seats.

 

[DRsohail]

The first true words from accidental chairman.

 

[Bewal Express]

The first true words from accidental chairman.

The Nooras and PPP supporters staying away from the thread as it will cause narazki between them after Billo told the truth about the crooked NS.

 

[Minnowbasher]

And your dad wasn't?
Bruv your dad killed your mum to get into power enough of this 'select' nonsense.
Your dad selected himself

 

[AdamM97]

Oh the irony Bilawal!!

 

[Savak]

Lol, looks like Billoo is unhappy at the so called establishment being closer to PML N than PPP.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Accountability should be for all, including the unconstitutional selectors.

Very vague statement. And for the record, the selectors do have internal accountability. A few like Kayani get away but there is still greater accountability there than any of these crooks have ever gotten from the justice system.

 

[Rinnegan Sasuke]

Very vague statement. And for the record, the selectors do have internal accountability. A few like Kayani get away but there is still greater accountability there than any of these crooks have ever gotten from the justice system.

Why is it internal? Why is an institution allowed to do as it pleases? Why don't we just stop with the games and amend our constitution and officially become a stratocracy?

 

[Rinnegan Sasuke]

Well Ayub Selected ZAB, Zia selected NS and both are dead. Who else do you want prosecuted?

Anyone who functions and acts outside their constitutional boundaries.

 

[Bewal Express]

Anyone who functions and acts outside their constitutional boundaries.

I agree, NS recently conspired with Fazlu, is it time to put article 6 on both, Or shall I say all 3 because Billo was part of it. Do you want NS prosecuted for conspiring with Zia?

 

[Syed1]

Anyone who functions and acts outside their constitutional boundaries.

Yes, agreed. Recently NS, Billoo Rani and Mullah Diesel conspired to bring down a sitting government and superseded their constitutional boundaries. Should we apply Article 6 on them. Do you know the punishment for Article 6?

 

[cric_man]

And your dad wasn't?
Bruv your dad killed your mum to get into power enough of this 'select' nonsense.
Your dad selected himself

Found a handwritten will magically a few hours after BB's death.

 

[Rinnegan Sasuke]

Yes, agreed. Recently NS, Billoo Rani and Mullah Diesel conspired to bring down a sitting government and superseded their constitutional boundaries. Should we apply Article 6 on them. Do you know the punishment for Article 6?

I agree, NS recently conspired with Fazlu, is it time to put article 6 on both, Or shall I say all 3 because Billo was part of it. Do you want NS prosecuted for conspiring with Zia?

Yes, as I said before, accountability should be for all. Do you both agree what the GHQ is doing and has been doing is unconstitutional and should also be dealt with?

 

[Bewal Express]

Yes, as I said before, accountability should be for all. Do you both agree what the GHQ is doing and has been doing is unconstitutional and should also be dealt with?

Has done but at the moment, i dont see any thing that is unconstitutional. If you can, can you give an example.

 

[Rinnegan Sasuke]

Has done but at the moment, i dont see any thing that is unconstitutional. If you can, can you give an example.

Do you really believe NS left solely on the verdict of the LHC?

 

[Waseem]

Nawaz Sharif was Usman Buzdar of Zia ul Haq, he was selected because he was simple and harmless "bhola bhaala". He was an absolute nobody before he was selected so as SELECTED as they come.

On the other hand who gave Bilawal right to call others selected when he is out and out selection; no struggle, no political history and was selected as party chairman based on mother's will lol, this is one of most pathetic ways of getting selected and he calls out others

 

[Bewal Express]

Do you really believe NS left solely on the verdict of the LHC?

Yes, although IK didnt fight it. Why did the LHC allow him to leave?

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Why is it internal? Why is an institution allowed to do as it pleases? Why don't we just stop with the games and amend our constitution and officially become a stratocracy?

If a master begins to act intimidated by his servants, is the servant really to be blamed when he starts acting like the master himself?

 

[Rinnegan Sasuke]

Yes, although IK didnt fight it. Why did the LHC allow him to leave?

I doubt he'd have been able to leave without the approval of the establishment.

 

[Rinnegan Sasuke]

If a master begins to act intimidated by his servants, is the servant really to be blamed when he starts acting like the master himself?

Why did the master become intimidated by the servant in the first place?

 

[Bewal Express]

I doubt he'd have been able to leave without the approval of the establishment.

Are you counting the Judiciary as part of the establishment?

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Why did the master become intimidated by the servant in the first place?

I think the master didn't believe he was the master. Because if he did he would have acted like one and asserted his position. One can't expect to do nothing and cry foul when people walk all over him.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Nawaz Sharif was Usman Buzdar of Zia ul Haq, he was selected because he was simple and harmless "bhola bhaala". He was an absolute nobody before he was selected so as SELECTED as they come.

On the other hand who gave Bilawal right to call others selected when he is out and out selection; no struggle, no political history and was selected as party chairman based on mother's will lol, this is one of most pathetic ways of getting selected and he calls out others

Bilawal is a powerless child who is simply trying to draw attention. He is irrelevant just like his party and this is his way of reminding people that he exists.

 

[Mueez]

Even though he is criticizing NS, how could you take this “jab baarish hoti hai” seriously?

He contradicts himself every time whenever he gives a press conference.

 

[Rinnegan Sasuke]

Are you counting the Judiciary as part of the establishment?

I believe certain sections of the judiciary have been corrupted over the constant years of rot and would be malleable at the hands of the establishment. That's why I want accountability across the board.

 

[Rinnegan Sasuke]

I think the master didn't believe he was the master. Because if he did he would have acted like one and asserted his position. One can't expect to do nothing and cry foul when people walk all over him.

It was more the servant stabbing the master in the back. It was the unfortunate demise of our Quaid that gave way for the military to come forth and launch a smear campaign against Fatimah Jinnah.

 

[Bewal Express]

I believe certain sections of the judiciary have been corrupted over the constant years of rot and would be malleable at the hands of the establishment. That's why I want accountability across the board.

99% of the Judiciary is corrupt, and as we have seen they are in the hands of the mafia. In which country does a CJ of a high Court ask the PM to guarantee the life of a prisoner for 72 hours. The Judiciary is not under the control of the army, they are controlled by the mafia.

 

[Bewal Express]

I believe certain sections of the judiciary have been corrupted over the constant years of rot and would be malleable at the hands of the establishment. That's why I want accountability across the board.

Btw
You want accountability across the board but there is no accountability at all. NAB chairman is a sexual predator, when he was exposed both Billo and Maryam spoke up for him, why do you think that is. As long as this crook is head of NAB there is no accountability. Its a myth that NAB are prosecuting anyone, they aren't.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

It was more the servant stabbing the master in the back. It was the unfortunate demise of our Quaid that gave way for the military to come forth and launch a smear campaign against Fatimah Jinnah.

Can't say I am surprised that you have a tunnel vision point-of-view regarding this, because most people do. Indeed the demise of our Quaid was most unfortunate and had he lived for even a few more years the outlook of this country could have been vastly different. But to say that the master wasn't himself a dead man walking is disingenuous because the politicians that succeeded the Quaid were politically inept feudals and their actions, or rather their inaction over the course of nearly a decade paved the way for what followed. The idea of boiling down the origin of the military's power to one event shows to me that you lack historical insight. Because nothing substantial ever happens because one smear campaign or one rigged election, it happens because it is part of a far larger process.

 

[Rinnegan Sasuke]

Can't say I am surprised that you have a tunnel vision point-of-view regarding this, because most people do. Indeed the demise of our Quaid was most unfortunate and had he lived for even a few more years the outlook of this country could have been vastly different. But to say that the master wasn't himself a dead man walking is disingenuous because the politicians that succeeded the Quaid were politically inept feudals and their actions, or rather their inaction over the course of nearly a decade paved the way for what followed. The idea of boiling down the origin of the military's power to one event shows to me that you lack historical insight. Because nothing substantial ever happens because one smear campaign or one rigged election, it happens because it is part of a far larger process.

I'm always open to constructive criticism, tell me where you feel my viewpoint is flawed? I'd like to rectify that if that is the case.

The Fatimah Jinnah fiasco was just one example I was giving, I'm not boiling it down to one incident. I will cite the passing of our Quaid as the biggest reason though, because with him around a few more years we would have had at least a robust constitution.

My biggest gripe is why aren't there attempts to rectify this problem? We as a country should have discourse on how to become a functioning democratic country rather than the GHQ's plaything. Are we ok with having an establishment?

 

[Rinnegan Sasuke]

99% of the Judiciary is corrupt, and as we have seen they are in the hands of the mafia. In which country does a CJ of a high Court ask the PM to guarantee the life of a prisoner for 72 hours. The Judiciary is not under the control of the army, they are controlled by the mafia.

Btw
You want accountability across the board but there is no accountability at all. NAB chairman is a sexual predator, when he was exposed both Billo and Maryam spoke up for him, why do you think that is. As long as this crook is head of NAB there is no accountability. Its a myth that NAB are prosecuting anyone, they aren't.

We are on the same page regarding the mafia, but the establishment has also ruled over the country for many years, and their influence can still be seen. They should be answerable to the elected government, not the other way around.

Bewal, what is it that we're debating about? NAB is a whole other discussion I'd be happy to have, but to keep it short they've been a farce, and I believe we need proper legislation to have it completely independent. Let me ask you, are you okay with having a military establishment?

 

[Bewal Express]

We are on the same page regarding the mafia, but the establishment has also ruled over the country for many years, and their influence can still be seen. They should be answerable to the elected government, not the other way around.

Bewal, what is it that we're debating about? NAB is a whole other discussion I'd be happy to have, but to keep it short they've been a farce, and I believe we need proper legislation to have it completely independent. Let me ask you, are you okay with having a military establishment?

I am not a fan per se but If it keeps traitors like NS and AZ out of office, then yes. They have made major huge errors and they can't undue those but they can ensure they don't make the same errors again.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

I'm always open to constructive criticism, tell me where you feel my viewpoint is flawed? I'd like to rectify that if that is the case.

The Fatimah Jinnah fiasco was just one example I was giving, I'm not boiling it down to one incident. I will cite the passing of our Quaid as the biggest reason though, because with him around a few more years we would have had at least a robust constitution.

My biggest gripe is why aren't there attempts to rectify this problem? We as a country should have discourse on how to become a functioning democratic country rather than the GHQ's plaything. Are we ok with having an establishment?

So I think there are a number of factors that influence the current situation. Firstly the establishment is entrenched in all important areas of the state structure which is what serves as the basis of the power. Secondly, the politicians who are supposed to do something about it have proven themselves to be spineless. Alas, without the patronage of the establishment most of them would not be politicians in the first place. Then ofcourse they're crooked to the core which makes them nervous about what may happen if they over-stepped. Finally, there's foreign policy and the strategic and national security considerations that come with Pakistan's geography and the dangerous neighborhood we live in. Here the establishment has proven itself to be competent in some areas while also successfully positioning itself as the guardian of Pakistan's national interest.

With these determinants in-place its tough to see any qualitative change happen overnight. If you ask me, I don't think Pakistan is ready to be a fully-functioning democracy just yet. To actually be a successful democracy; rule-of-law, accountability and strong, apolitical institutions are essential pre-requisites. I don't see any of these three factors working with any degree of success in Pakistan today. Add to that our venal political system and it becomes evident that the chances of things getting worse are much higher.

So this may be an unpopular and a realpolitik POV but Pakistan's current system, where you basically have a hybrid system is probably the best case scenario for now. It doesn't give the military complete control and a potentially strong govt. with a clear majority in the NA could assert itself more confidently. As a result you could have both sides balancing each other, without one side getting too bellicose. The military will have the tilt in its favor but a succession of competent governments could radically change things and maybe even move us closer to achieving democracy that actually works.

Ultimately though, democracy or controlled democracy; the most evident precondition for change, atleast to me seems to be the competence of the political class. And whether or not they will actually be able to prove it by first of all, moving away from their petty self-interests. Because remember nobody in power cedes it for no good reason.

 

[Waseem]

We are on the same page regarding the mafia, but the establishment has also ruled over the country for many years, and their influence can still be seen. They should be answerable to the elected government, not the other way around.

Bewal, what is it that we're debating about? NAB is a whole other discussion I'd be happy to have, but to keep it short they've been a farce, and I believe we need proper legislation to have it completely independent. Let me ask you, are you okay with having a military establishment?

It's actually quite naive to think military establishment is not required. They exist in every part of the world and have huge influence in most part of the worlds. Do you really think US establishment play no part in US or India for that matter? In fact Indian media, judiciary and military are pretty much on same page right now working closely with Modi to achieve their goals.
What you can argue about is the level of involvement, our military establishment goes too far and in fact military even directly ruled the country which should not be acceptable to anyone. Their influence in politics also need to be substantially reduced but that would NEVER happen as long as you have political leaders who compromise due to personal greed. Only strong institutions and powerful political leaders can reduce role of military establishment.

 

[Rinnegan Sasuke]

So I think there are a number of factors that influence the current situation. Firstly the establishment is entrenched in all important areas of the state structure which is what serves as the basis of the power. Secondly, the politicians who are supposed to do something about it have proven themselves to be spineless. Alas, without the patronage of the establishment most of them would not be politicians in the first place. Then ofcourse they're crooked to the core which makes them nervous about what may happen if they over-stepped. Finally, there's foreign policy and the strategic and national security considerations that come with Pakistan's geography and the dangerous neighborhood we live in. Here the establishment has proven itself to be competent in some areas while also successfully positioning itself as the guardian of Pakistan's national interest.

With these determinants in-place its tough to see any qualitative change happen overnight. If you ask me, I don't think Pakistan is ready to be a fully-functioning democracy just yet. To actually be a successful democracy; rule-of-law, accountability and strong, apolitical institutions are essential pre-requisites. I don't see any of these three factors working with any degree of success in Pakistan today. Add to that our venal political system and it becomes evident that the chances of things getting worse are much higher.

So this may be an unpopular and a realpolitik POV but Pakistan's current system, where you basically have a hybrid system is probably the best case scenario for now. It doesn't give the military complete control and a potentially strong govt. with a clear majority in the NA could assert itself more confidently. As a result you could have both sides balancing each other, without one side getting too bellicose. The military will have the tilt in its favor but a succession of competent governments could radically change things and maybe even move us closer to achieving democracy that actually works.

Ultimately though, democracy or controlled democracy; the most evident precondition for change, atleast to me seems to be the competence of the political class. And whether or not they will actually be able to prove it by first of all, moving away from their petty self-interests. Because remember nobody in power cedes it for no good reason.

I agree, and that was primarily why I voted for PTI, but so far it seems whoever comes, comes at the cost of complete subservience to the establishment. How would balance grow from such a situation?

Have they proven themselves? Look, geopolitics is never straightforward and there's no black and white but looking back has our foreign policy been beneficial? Whatever our interests in Afghanistan were, was it really worth the blowback?

My only concern is, wouldn't the military want to continue that current status quo? Wouldn't they try and interfere seeing their power potentially ceding towards civilians?

 

[Mamoon]

People who beat the “military and government on the same page” drum fail to realize that in Pakistan, the military establishment determines the page number.

The relationship between the military and federal government in Pakistan is not give and take. Only one side makes the concessions to protect itself.

Imran Khan has proved to be no different. His shameless U-turns on Musharraf treason case and the COAS extension proves that absolutely nothing has changed as far as the power dynamic is concerned.

No country would want the armed forces and the federal government to be at logger-heads with each other. However, the relationship between Imran and Bajwa is clearly not the same as the relationship between Modi and his chief.

The office of the Indian Chief changed hands without any fuss, while Pakistan’s constitution had to be amended because Bajwa is intoxicated with power and cannot let go of his precious office.

The excuse and the justification provided were embarrassing for the armed forces as an institution.

As long as the armed forces remain superior to the federal government, there can be no politically stability in Pakistan. All this talk of the “same page” is nonsense.

Again, it is not a give and take relationship with both sides making concessions. Far from it.

 

[Rinnegan Sasuke]

It's actually quite naive to think military establishment is not required. They exist in every part of the world and have huge influence in most part of the worlds. Do you really think US establishment play no part in US or India for that matter? In fact Indian media, judiciary and military are pretty much on same page right now working closely with Modi to achieve their goals.
What you can argue about is the level of involvement, our military establishment goes too far and in fact military even directly ruled the country which should not be acceptable to anyone. Their influence in politics also need to be substantially reduced but that would NEVER happen as long as you have political leaders who compromise due to personal greed. Only strong institutions and powerful political leaders can reduce role of military establishment.

Of course there is, just not at the level it functions in Pakistan. As I said in my previous post, foreign policy, geopolitics isn't a clear cut path. I'm concerned with their doings on the civilian side, which you've aptly described. How can we achieve strong institutions and have powerful leaders when they control the playing field with such ferocity? Even Imran had to compromise on his stance regarding the establishment and he barely scraped a majority.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

I agree, and that was primarily why I voted for PTI, but so far it seems whoever comes, comes at the cost of complete subservience to the establishment. How would balance grow from such a situation?

Have they proven themselves? Look, geopolitics is never straightforward and there's no black and white but looking back has our foreign policy been beneficial? Whatever our interests in Afghanistan were, was it really worth the blowback?

My only concern is, wouldn't the military want to continue that current status quo? Wouldn't they try and interfere seeing their power potentially ceding towards civilians?

I think we need to understand that PTI cannot really do anything to move out of the military's garb. And the reason for that are the independents that PTI is dependent on, who can change sides with the snap of a finger and are loyal only to money.

Regarding geo-politics, like you said it is never straightforward. I think alot comes down to perception, and hindsight is not something you can have. My personal view is that the military, despite all its numerous blunders has succeeded in resisting Indian hegemony. This may sound like a vague statement but when you look at South Asia, all countries are under India's sphere of influence in one way or another, out of whom many are compromising on their sovereignty. While Pakistan can never match India militarily, nor do I feel there is a need for war, I do feel it is in our strategic interests to resist Indian influence. Peace, trade and everything else should happen but on notions of parity and equality. The military's thinking as an institution is geared towards thinking like that which is perhaps also why Sharif, who wanted trade, peace and crucially, a father-son relationship with India, was sent packing.

In regards to Afghanistan, look I don't think Pakistan was really in a position to say no to the US. And if we had definitively said yes, I assure you we would have been in a far worse position today. It simply was a catch 22 situation. And to it's credit, the military has managed to maintain Pakistan's influence in Afghanistan.

The fact that we have nuclear weapons is also no small feat. It has given us minimum credible deterrence. And the military has had a major role in not just making that possible but also ensuring we have a proper command-and-control structure in-place.


My only concern is, wouldn't the military want to continue that current status quo? Wouldn't they try and interfere seeing their power potentially ceding towards civilians?

They would. But the military has positioned itself as the institution that is a) competent and b) knows how to get things done. Both of which are not exactly true. The problem is that politicians have fared even worse. And their widespread corruption has destroyed their image in the eyes of the public. However, if they actually manage to get their act together and can a) be competent and b) get things done, I assure you the military's influence will slowly decline. The prospect of a martial law has effectively been eliminated but at the same time you can't expect to finish the military's influence overnight. So this is really the only way.

 

[Rinnegan Sasuke]

I think we need to understand that PTI cannot really do anything to move out of the military's garb. And the reason for that are the independents that PTI is dependent on, who can change sides with the snap of a finger and are loyal only to money.

Regarding geo-politics, like you said it is never straightforward. I think alot comes down to perception, and hindsight is not something you can have. My personal view is that the military, despite all its numerous blunders has succeeded in resisting Indian hegemony. This may sound like a vague statement but when you look at South Asia, all countries are under India's sphere of influence in one way or another, out of whom many are compromising on their sovereignty. While Pakistan can never match India militarily, nor do I feel there is a need for war, I do feel it is in our strategic interests to resist Indian influence. Peace, trade and everything else should happen but on notions of parity and equality. The military's thinking as an institution is geared towards thinking like that which is perhaps also why Sharif, who wanted trade, peace and crucially, a father-son relationship with India, was sent packing.

In regards to Afghanistan, look I don't think Pakistan was really in a position to say no to the US. And if we had definitively said yes, I assure you we would have been in a far worse position today. It simply was a catch 22 situation. And to it's credit, the military has managed to maintain Pakistan's influence in Afghanistan.

The fact that we have nuclear weapons is also no small feat. It has given us minimum credible deterrence. And the military has had a major role in not just making that possible but also ensuring we have a proper command-and-control structure in-place.


My only concern is, wouldn't the military want to continue that current status quo? Wouldn't they try and interfere seeing their power potentially ceding towards civilians?

They would. But the military has positioned itself as the institution that is a) competent and b) knows how to get things done. Both of which are not exactly true. The problem is that politicians have fared even worse. And their widespread corruption has destroyed their image in the eyes of the public. However, if they actually manage to get their act together and can a) be competent and b) get things done, I assure you the military's influence will slowly decline. The prospect of a martial law has effectively been eliminated but at the same time you can't expect to finish the military's influence overnight. So this is really the only way.

Yes, you do have a point. Although, let's say PTI had a clear majority, would things have been different? All the turncoats who've become a big part of the party have shared a bed with the establishment for years and would jump ship on a snap. There's a big difference between PTI before and after the 2013 elections. I do not regret my vote though, and I plan to give them the full 5 years, and as an optimist, I believe they'll be weeded out. I know it will never happen overnight. The only thing we can do is wait.

That's an interesting viewpoint, but I must ask, who benefits most from having bad relations with India? Who gets the biggest piece of the pie based on fighting off the Indians? We had the best relationship in years during 2016. A Cordial relationship with mutual benefits wouldn't help their case in being at the top of the food chain. I'm not claiming this to be a hundred percent the case, of course, just another viewpoint and I'd like your opinion on it. (Also, this would be before the BJP's warmongering phase to win their elections and hide their failures)

Yes, but wasn't it us who put ourselves in that position? Would we have been involved in the war on terror had we not had a history of being war dogs for the US? Had Ayub not become Eisenhower's pawn during the cold war, would we have the same standing the eyes of the US as mercenaries. I agree, having hindsight changes everything, but one does have to wonder.

Won't find me disagreeing regarding having nuclear capability, that was indeed a very successful endeavor that would have been impossible without the armed forces. They did what any military/intelligence is meant to do, and that's my point, whenever they step out of their area of expertise, they make things worse.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Yes, you do have a point. Although, let's say PTI had a clear majority, would things have been different? All the turncoats who've become a big part of the party have shared a bed with the establishment for years and would jump ship on a snap. There's a big difference between PTI before and after the 2013 elections. I do not regret my vote though, and I plan to give them the full 5 years, and as an optimist, I believe they'll be weeded out. I know it will never happen overnight. The only thing we can do is wait.

That's an interesting viewpoint, but I must ask, who benefits most from having bad relations with India? Who gets the biggest piece of the pie based on fighting off the Indians? We had the best relationship in years during 2016. A Cordial relationship with mutual benefits wouldn't help their case in being at the top of the food chain. I'm not claiming this to be a hundred percent the case, of course, just another viewpoint and I'd like your opinion on it. (Also, this would be before the BJP's warmongering phase to win their elections and hide their failures)

Yes, but wasn't it us who put ourselves in that position? Would we have been involved in the war on terror had we not had a history of being war dogs for the US? Had Ayub not become Eisenhower's pawn during the cold war, would we have the same standing the eyes of the US as mercenaries. I agree, having hindsight changes everything, but one does have to wonder.

Won't find me disagreeing regarding having nuclear capability, that was indeed a very successful endeavor that would have been impossible without the armed forces. They did what any military/intelligence is meant to do, and that's my point, whenever they step out of their area of expertise, they make things worse.

I think you can't predict these things. I would say that if I look back to 2008 I think the country has become more politically mature. And I'm sure regular elections and transfers of power will only strengthen democracy. Unfortunately not much can be done about the influence of money even if you have a strong, accountable system. There will always be turncoats and there will always be someone to pay them. Democracy after all has many flaws itself.

My view is that India wants a lopsided relationship with Pakistan, one that clearly establishes it as the leader/hegemon of South Asia because that is how India views itself. It does not benefit from having a mutually beneficial relationship with a smaller country. Just look at their trade with Bangladesh or their FTAs with Sri Lanka. And I'm talking about India under a more normal government because the current government benefits from having a bad relationship with Pakistan. And even if Pakistan were to somehow accept this, Kashmir will always be a thaw in the relationship. For Pakistan and especially, the establishment Kashmir is an unresolved issue. And therefore Pakistan will persist to keep the pot boiling in Kashmir, whereas India, which considers it an integral part will continue trying to somehow (by hook or by crook) integrate it into India. In the near future I don't see the thinking of policymakers on both sides changing. But it is possible to imagine more cordial relations maybe a few generations later when the policymakers on both sides are those whose parents and grandparents have witnessed neither Partition, nor any of the wars.

Again that's easy to say now but during the Cold War the reality was much different. The entire world was divided into two spheres, you had to pick a team. Even countries that projected themselves as non-aligned at first (India, Yugoslavia, Egypt, Indonesia) joined teams. And let's not forget Pakistan did benefit from the relationship. During our formative years we needed the aid while the defense weaponry was something we needed pretty much through out to keep up in the arms race because India, was actively being armed by the Soviet Union. Ultimately my point is that it's easy to cherry pick moments from history and critique them but we have to understand that the predecessors did not have the benefit of hindsight or of knowing how things will ultimately turn out. Plus most decisions are usually made while thinking about the short term.

The idea of funding/training/supporting the Mujahideen against the Soviets is one that comes to mind. Pakistan stood to gain alot from that and there were many reasons that made it seem like a great choice. After all, who could have predicted that America themselves would invade Afghanistan in 2001? or that some of the fighters will end up becoming hardcore terrorists?

 

[Abdullah719]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">PPP Chairperson Bilawal Bhutto Zardari has claimed that the both the PTI and PML-N have done nothing for the people of the country.<br><br>“During their tenures, there was no increase in wages or pension,” he said while speaking to the media in Lahore on Sunday<a href="https://t.co/uforHLqCxA">https://t.co/uforHLqCxA</a></p>— Samaa English (@SamaaEnglish) <a href="https://twitter.com/SamaaEnglish/status/1236690037099704323?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 8, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>