Re: Pakistan Army Generals
In China before Mau party (communists) took over, Mau saw government officials taking some farmers (peasants) for punishment. Mau started thinking that how is it possible that these officials (who were few) are taking these farmers for punishment and farmers can do nothing.
He pondered and then realised that, certainly, if these farmers were stronger then those officials, officials could not have managed to take them. Thus, it struck to Mau and he made statement that ‘Power comes from the barrel of a gun’.
Actually, anywhere in the world, power of ruler depends on the power that ruler possess in the country. If Army is ruling the country, they are ruling because no other power in the country is more powerful at the moment, then the army.
We should remember that:
Politicians get power based on their popularity amongst the population. If they are popular amongst masses, they gain popularity amongst army too, as people in the army are also part of population. That popularity safeguards them from army generals acting against them.
**Army generals **initially get power from the army they command. They can only overtake a country if the politician in power is not popular enough to challenge that takeover. No army general can takeover a country for personal reasons. If a general would try to overtake a popular political government, army would revolt.
Thus, army only manage to takeover a country when the politicians in power are not doing their job. This happens when politicians in power are corrupts, incompetents and are spreading nepotism. Well, whatever the reasons, takeover happens when people (and army) are not behind politicians and are fed up with them.
As for Nawaz Shareef and BaiNazeer, they and their party collectively ruled for 11 years and during those time, both showed they were mega corrupts, incompetents and full of nepotism. Army could have taken over anytime, but they did not. If army allowed them to stay in power for 11 years collectively, it was because no one in the army wanted to kick them.
Even army (Musharraf) would not have taken over Pakistan if Nawaz kept himself within the law. To try to stop commercial aircraft of a national airline (PIA) carrying Musharraf from landing in Pakistan was asking for takeover. Army reacted and Nawaz was out.
What Nawaz Shareef did, not even president of USA could do, that try to stop a aircraft of an American commercial airline to land in USA and thus risk the life of all on the aircraft, just because he does not like a person on the aircraft.
Well, even sacking army chief, Gen Karamat or trying to sack Gen Musharraf was a provocation, that no politician in the world would do. Pakistan is not Nawaz colony nor Nawaz is King of Pakistan that Nawaz as prime minister can sack someone just because he does not like that person. It seems Nawaz became lunatic assuming that he became God in Pakistan. [Pakistan may ussay vazarat kiya mili, Nawaz samjhnay laga kay woh Khuda ban giya hay].
Even prime minister of UK could not do that. He cannot sack a lowest rank army personal or even a lowest government servant, just because he does not like that person.
[Nawaz is lucky to be alive. If I was in place of Musharraf or if there was some other person, Nawaz would have met his creator before his father. When Nawaz tried to get Musharraf killed, as that would have happened because plane would have crashed if army did not acted, it is surprising why Musharraf did not do the same to Nawaz (get him legally killed).
Just imagine that Bhutto did not even threatened Zia life or tried to sack Zia, but based on assumptions that Bhutto was having some bad feeling for Zia, Zia got him legally hanged].
Regardless, what I want to say is that, for Pakistan to have sustainable democracy, we need new political faces that have no corrupt background, are honest, competent, above nepotism [they are not aqarba parver, be it on the basis of brotherhood (bradri), provincialism (subayeet), party loyalty or personal relationship], and are willing to serve the country intelligently, humbly and selflessly. Unfortunately, I do not see any politicians like that in present Pakistan.
Once we have such politicians, they have to become popular enough to get victory in election and become prime minister. Once that is done, their performance based on above characters would make them popular enough that no army general would takeover (well, such politicians would become popular in army too).
Else, Pakistan will always have politicians that could not rule as right (haq) but would rule with consent of army.
Once an army general starts ruling the country (after takeover), people also start judging him on above basis and if that general is good, he gains popularity amongst the masses. Most people wants efficient person with good characters (as mentioned above) to rule the country and are not much concerned how they got into power.
In 1999, when Musharraf came to power, Pakistanis had not seen his performance and he was much weaker in power then today. For politicians to oust him in 1999 was easier (if they had any popularity amongst people) but today, he is many fold stronger as its not only army behind him but many amongst masses, whereas, most politicians have lost their little popularity they had in 1999.
Thus, for all who want a change in Pakistan (unless Musharraf decides to leave voluntarily) they should keep barking or praying.
MMA: In 2001, during American bombing on Afghanistan, we saw the best what Mullahs could throw (few demonstration here and there) and if they could not show much strength then, their future chances are nil. They got few NA and PA seats (due to Musharraf nawazish, a way to kick Peoples party and Nawaz party and probably also to send messages to USA about what could be there) but it seems, MMA future is bleak.
MMA is collection of religious parties, most would not like to pray behind others, but as establishment (and army) created IJI, they created MMA. MMA strength, whatever little, is due to combination of religious factions, that is deteriorating day by day, and their little popularity is fading fast.
Their little popularity was due to Musharraf ditching Taliban and many (especially in NWFP, not because of Islam but because of Taliban being Pakhtun) felt sympathy with Taliban who were bombed by Americans (in 2001), hence many in Pakhtun areas voted MMA in 2002 election (though, this was facilitated by Musharraf desire to get few religious faces in parliament).
As for Nawaz and BB, they know very well what they are worth amongst the people of Pakistan. Nawaz in 1999 was more popular then today (due to ignorance amongst some people about him at that time) and still none came out on road when army took over and put him into prison. Situation of BB in popularity is not that far behind NS, rather a bit better. Nevertheless, BB is cleaver and knows where she stands. Thus, she is trying her best to make a deal with Musharraf.
