Re: Anti-Pakistan Army
Haris let's say for argument's sake that a military take over is sometimes THE only option (although not an ideal scenario) left to get rid of a corrupt and incompetent government, even then the military government should be duty bound by the constitution to hold fresh elections in 6 months at the latest. The political process must not be halted for long periods. It's because of these extended periods of military rule that democratic institutions have not been able to flourish in Pakistan. Yes most of our politicians are extremely corrupt and incompetent, yes most of them are self-serving feudal land owners and yes they will make mistakes in the future, still the process should go on and the hope is that one day someone like Jinnah or Mahatir would emerge from this rubble that's Pakistani politics. Yes people danced in the streets in 1999 but that still does not mean that the army should see itself as an alternative to democracy or civilian rule.
That's why I am in favour of bringing back the 8th amendment (again not an ideal scenario but still better than military rule) - atleast until democractic institutions have been strengthened in Pakistan and a system of appropriate checks and balances is introduced to minimise corruption by elected leaders - whereby a civilian president (GIK in 1990 and 1993, Leghari in 1996) is able to dismiss a corrupt and incompetent PM/government. We might have seen a military coup as early as 1990 if this amendment had not been part of the constitution then.
Because Nawaz Sharif got rid of this amendment in 1996, it gave Musharraf the perfect excuse to topple him in 1999 (cf. Zia in 1977)
Thanks for that information on British COAS etc. but believe you me they are never in the British news or on TV (BBC, SKY, ITV, Channel 4 etc.) unless ofcourse Britain is involved in a war.
As I have said before the army's job is to protect the country against external and internal threats and not meddle in politics or the affairs of the state. The country loses respect in the eyes of the international community during military rule. Musharraf however he may endear himself to Bush and Blair, he will always be referred to as a military dictator in the Western media and would never be given the same respect and status (by these governments) as an elected civilian president or PM.