While driving towards Kunjah, about 10 kilometres to the west of Gujrat city, it is difficult to miss the change in scale; towns and villages, roads, shops and tea stalls, everything looks smaller than it does on the Grand Trunk Road that links Gujrat with Rawalpindi, to the north, and Lahore to the south. Within Kunjah, the scale shifts again — from small to narrow: bazaars are narrow, streets even narrower. It is hard to imagine that this is the native town of Raheel Sharif, arguably the most important, most powerful person in Pakistan.
In this old town of about 50,000 people, a labyrinth of narrow lanes leads to a blind alley where a dilapidated two-storey locked house wears the same aura of mystery that all empty spaces acquire after their occupants have left long ago. This is where Chief of Army Staff General Raheel Sharif’s grandfather, Mehtabud Din, lived — as did the general’s father, Major Muhammad Sharif. It was also in this house that his elder brother Shabbir Sharif was born and raised until he joined the Pakistan Army in the early 1960s.
During the 1971 war with India, Shabbir Sharif was posted near Okara as a major. He died fighting there and won the highest military award, Nishan-e-Haider, for his gallantry. People in Kunjah are proud of him and, therefore, regard his ancestral home as a historic place.
Raheel Sharif, who is 13 years junior to Shabbir Sharif, spent most of his early life in the shadow of his illustrious brother. “At the Pakistan Military Academy [Kakul] and later in the army, there were always people, especially close friends of Shabbir Sharif, who had high expectations of Raheel Sharif. He had to work hard to come up to their expectations,” reminisces an old friend of the general in Lahore. “Being Shabbir Sharif’s brother was a heavy burden on his shoulders,” says the man who in 1974 shared a room at the military academy with Raheel Sharif and later served with him in the same platoon. “It was only slowly and gradually that Raheel Sharif was able to create his own identity and place in the army.”
Also read: Should the military fight crime or dispense justice
Raheel Sharif could see any of his elder brother’s army friends, including Pervez Musharraf, whenever he needed to. Being on such close, personal terms with one’s seniors could be a big advantage for a junior officer. They may help one get prized postings and quicker promotions. “Such suggestions always hurt him deeply, though they did not stop him from calling on his brother’s friends,” says his Lahore-based friend.
Raheel Sharif was not born in Kunjah. No one there has any memory of having seen him in town. He was born in Quetta where his father was posted as a major in the army. The family, indeed, had left Kunjah much earlier than Raheel Sharif’s birth in 1956. Only a few old people in the town can claim having known and interacted with his father and elder brother.
One of them is Haji Abdul Ghani, a retired soldier. He remembers Raheel Sharif’s father as someone who would always “help the people from Kunjah”. Even though Muhammad Sharif never returned to his home town once he left for wherever his army career took him, he continued helping local residents – including Ghani – to get into the army.
Ghani has never seen Raheel Sharif in person but he says the general, like his father, has a “soft spot for Kunjah and its residents”. Why else would he call Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif and ask him to upgrade the Shabbir Shaheed Rural Health Centre in Kunjah? “When some people from our town met [Raheel Sharif] to condole the death of his mother in 2014, they complained to him about inadequate public healthcare here,” Ghani says. That promptly occasioned the call to the chief minister.
Raheel Sharif, like his predecessors, considers it his obligation to do “what he thinks is right regardless of its constitutional or democratic appropriateness.”
The general comes from a religious family. His grandfather, after whom their home street is named as Koocha Mehtabud Din, was a known religious scholar in the area, whose forefathers had settled in Kunjah in 1840. A younger cousin of Raheel Sharif who still lives in Kunjah knows the general as a friendly person who does not let anyone feel insignificant in his presence. “He knows how to give respect to others and how to command respect from them,” the cousin says without wanting to be named. Raheel Sharif also loves driving cars and hunting game, according to his cousin. “Being a chain-smoker, he looks out of his element when he cannot smoke.”
Within the military, says one of his old friends, Raheel Sharif is known from his early days in uniform as a man of strong character and steely resolve. “I remember a boxing game at the academy in which Bobby [Raheel Sharif] was pitted against a tough opponent. I do not remember who won the contest but he bravely took all the punches from his opponent, with the same expressionless face you see on television channels, and never left the fight.”
Raheel Sharif is also considered to be one of the most popular army chiefs in recent times. “His ability to inspire confidence and love in the troops is quite remarkable,” says his friend from the military academy.
Musharraf, who was a course mate of Shabbir Sharif, is also a big admirer of Raheel Sharif. “He has been to the most dangerous places in the (Zarb-e-Azb) battle zone. Many others would not dare go near those places fearing for their lives,” Musharraf says. “It is Raheel Sharif’s strong character and compassion for his juniors that sets him apart from the rest of the pack. He is not just a commander but a leader — the one soldiers happily obey and follow in war,” the former president says in an interview in Karachi.
In 2015, Raheel Sharif’s popularity grew out of the barracks and spread across Pakistan, making him more popular than any politician including Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) chief Imran Khan. A mosque in Islamabad was named after him last year and his portraits could be spotted on the back of trucks and autorickshaws everywhere. Banners and billboards featuring his image still adorn the streets of almost every big city, particularly Karachi, and many contesting the recent local government elections put his photo on their publicity material to attract voters. Even on social media, a #ThankYouRaheelSharif hashtag has trended for months.
The reasons for his popularity are not difficult to comprehend in times of rampant terrorism, insecurity, corruption and a general disappointment with politics. He is widely credited with improving security in the country in general and Karachi in particular. He is also hailed for launching an anti-corruption drive, mostly focused against politicians.
Then there is this other argument advanced by scholars such as Aqil Shah, the author of The Army and Democracy: Military Politics in Pakistan. The surge in his popularity has been choreographed by the army’s public relations wing – Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) – and the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), is how this argument goes. “One key factor (behind the general’s popularity) is the relentless campaigns on news television channels and social media,” Shah tells the Herald in an email interview from the United States where he teaches politics at the Princeton University.
The media campaign, Shah says, emphasises Raheel Sharif’s ‘can do’ leadership and “unwavering moral courage in the face of an existential threat” to Pakistan. It also compares him to “selfish, corrupt and dithering” politicians such as Nawaz Sharif and Asif Ali Zardari and “glorifies him as almost a superhuman being, an omniscient commander of the faithful,” explains Shah.
This is not something extraordinary. The military’s public relations machine – consisting of an expanded and restructured ISPR and the Information Management Wing of the ISI headed by a major general or someone in an equivalent rank from the air force or the navy – routinely invest effort and money in constructing and maintaining a glorified public image of the armed forces, Shah says. “The retrofitted ISPR makes savvy use of social media and funds glitzy hyper-patriotic videos, songs and films, with the active collaboration of artists, actors, movie directors and writers. The ISI … metes out both sticks and carrots to journalists. Any journalist who dares question the picture-perfect image of Raheel Sharif or the military’s policies in, say, Balochistan can only do so at his or her own expense,” he adds.
Also read: Person of the Year 2015
The mass media’s role is central to this public relations exercise. “The military views the media as an ‘element of national power’ essential to mould public opinion and develop a consensus on national security,” Shah says. That is why hardly any days go by when Raheel Sharif’s images are not flashed frequently on television screens or across front pages of the newspapers.
The ultimate objective of the image-building exercise, however, is not just to glorify a general or provide heavily sanitised information about the military’s anti-militancy operation in the tribal lands of Waziristan or its anti-crime and anti-corruption efforts in Karachi. It is aimed at securing a bigger prize: exclusive power over the twin domains of national security and foreign policy.
The image-building, thus, has gone hand in hand with Raheel Sharif overshadowing the political landscape as far as handling internal security and foreign policy is concerned. He has been calling all the shots – or at the very least his has been the most important voice – in these two sectors.
This has not been lost on Pakistan’s foreign interlocutors. When Afghan President Ashraf Ghani made his first visit to Pakistan in 2014, he drove straight to the General Headquarters (GHQ) in Rawalpindi to meet Raheel Sharif before seeing the civilian leadership in Islamabad. The general spends a lot of his time visiting capitals across the globe – from London and Washington to Beijing and Kabul – to meet monarchs, presidents, prime ministers, foreign ministers and, yes, his own counterparts in other militaries. No important foreign dignitary visiting Islamabad leaves Pakistan without having a meeting with Raheel Sharif.
Also read: General (retd) Zaheerul Islam: The shadow warrior
Even though the rise in his public and official stature seems personal, it is not. It cannot be separated from a number of other developments that mark a massive increase in the military’s pre-eminence in national affairs. The passage of the Protection of Pakistan Act shortly after the launch of Zarb-e-Azb in July 2014, the announcement of the National Action Plan (NAP) in the aftermath of the Peshawar school attack in December that year and the passage of the 21st Amendment to the Constitution early in 2015 put together, according to Shah, “effectively took away the initiative from the civilians and handed it over on a platter to the military.”
These measures have helped the military encroach upon judicial terrain through the military courts set up earlier last year and override the elected administrations through apex committees at the federal and provincial levels. Even though these committees are not entirely dominated by the senior officials of the security and intelligence agencies, they give such officials a very prominent berth in civilian affairs constitutionally outside their domain. “The NAP codifies military supremacy over civilians as is evident in the structure and functioning of the apex committees … which place the generals above reproach and accountability,” says Shah.
When Nawaz Sharif became prime minister for a third term in the summer of 2013, there was some optimism that the balance of power was finally swinging in favour of the civilian leadership. In the first few months of his tenure, civilian control over what the military traditionally considers its own domain – national security and foreign policy – seemed to be growing. The government initiated talks with Taliban militants in the tribal backyard of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and tried to open dialogue with separatists in Balochistan despite the military’s reservations on both counts. On the external front, peace overtures were made to India with promises of much-delayed liberalisation of bilateral trade; and Afghanistan was assured of any support it required for the resolution of its seemingly eternal conflict.
Emboldened by the relative ease with which the government could take these steps, Nawaz Sharif then overreached and decided to put former military dictator Musharraf on trial for high treason. The civilian administration blocked all his moves to get out of the country. And even while the military was acting behind the scenes to ensure that he spent his time either in a military-run hospital or in the comfort of his own farmhouse in Islamabad, the government did not have any trouble in continuing with the trial — until it suddenly did.
A crucial factor that changed the dynamics of the trial appears to be the choice of General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani’s successor as the army chief.
The reasons for Raheel Sharif’s popularity are not difficult to comprehend in times of rampant terrorism, insecurity, corruption and a general disappointment with politics.
At first, and in strictly military terms, Raheel Sharif looked like a suitable choice for the post even though he was third on the seniority list and was not commanding a corps. He, however, was instrumental in creating a counter-insurgency doctrine – which focuses on training and preparing the army for anti-terrorism operations – as the Inspector General for Training and Evaluation. Those who elevated him to the post of the Chief of Army Staff perhaps did not know of his close family ties with Musharraf or if they did, they did not consider them a problem.
In an interview with the Herald, Musharraf acknowledges being in touch with Raheel Sharif since leaving the office of the president in 2008. Though he says the frequency of their interaction has decreased after Raheel Sharif became the army chief “so that he did not come under any criticism” for that, the two regularly exchange messages on important personal and social occasions.
That personal link between the two generals still does not fully explain how and why the tide started turning against the civilian leadership and the power balance started tilting back to the military’s favour. The rest of the answer is provided by two apparently unrelated developments.
Also read: In conversation with Pervez Musharraf
One of them was the start of the operation Zarb-e-Azb in the middle of 2014 when the military did not bother to seek permission from the civilian leadership and launched a massive campaign against the Taliban in Waziristan. The government, at that point, was still pursuing a policy of negotiated peace with the militants based in the tribal areas. It was only after the operation got well under way that the civilian leadership endorsed it.
The other development was the Islamabad sit-in by Khan’s PTI and Tahirul Qadri of the Pakistan Awami Tehreek (PAT) which also started in the middle of 2014 and continued till the terrorist attack on the Peshawar school. This is how the conspiracy theory goes: after the elected government resisted to share its authority with the military in areas the latter believes exclusively its own, the sit-in helped the military turn tables on the government. A mix of mishandling of the protests, the government’s stubborn resistance to negotiate with Khan and Qadri, and the willingness of the leaders of the protests to go to any extreme – regardless of how violent and destabilising it became – allowed the military to regain centre stage.
This theory was endorsed by Javed Hashmi when he resigned as the PTI chairman accusing Khan of forwarding the agenda of some generals to the detriment of a democratically elected government and parliament. Analysts like Shah also claim that the military leadership under Raheel Sharif “engineered the protests” to cut Nawaz Sharif down to size on issues such as Musharraf’s trial and Pakistan’s policies towards India and Afghanistan.
Syed Riffat Hussain, who heads the Government and Public Policy Department at Islamabad’s National University of Sciences and Technology (Nust) is not a believer in this theory. He does not think the military as an institution was involved in destabilising the government. He points out that Raheel Sharif, on the other hand, stepped in with a compromise formula to resolve the stand-off only when the situation became too tense and the protesters started attacking government buildings and installations in Islamabad. “He was willing to play a role for reconciliation between the government and the protesters,” says Hussain.
Neither the government nor the protesters, however, were ready to listen to him. When no one showed interest in accepting his compromise formula that offered to address the PTI’s vote-rigging grievances if it dropped the demand for the prime minister’s resignation, he backed off, adds Hussain.
In either case, the government had to spend so much political capital on taking care of the protests, and their political fallout, that Nawaz Sharif and his senior aides were left with little energy and capacity to continue being in charge of national security and foreign policy. Musharraf’s trial, too, fell through the political cracks created by the sit-ins.
A heavily guarded compound of around 20 houses sits atop a hillock just behind the Zamzama Street on the confluence of the Clifton and Defence Housing Authority (DHA) neighbourhoods. The guards are all in military uniform. Anyone seeking to enter the area must have prior appointments and permissions. It is in this completely cordoned off – and very quiet – corner of Karachi that Musharraf now lives. Nobody can reach him expect with the military’s permission.
That is a perfect metaphor for the limits that civilian power has always had in Pakistan: the military enjoys exclusive spaces where civil administration cannot dare enter. Extend this to statecraft and what you get is a huge imbalance in power between the military and the civilian parts of the polity.
“This historical civil-military imbalance has endured because we treat Pakistan as a security state and see every issue through a security lens. Unless this trend is changed, the imbalance will endure no matter what,” is how Hussain explains this not-so-unusual phenomenon in Pakistan’s political history.
Since early 2015, the military has aggressively used this imbalance in its favour. In the latest manifestation of it, the military leadership has been breathing hard down the neck of the provincial government in Sindh on real or perceived connections between terrorism and corruption. Both the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) and the Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) are facing the heat generated by the arrests and trials of their leaders and activists, and by being constantly bashed in the media ostensibly on the military’s prompting. Media commentators routinely dub the two political parties as corrupt, supportive of organised crime and terrorism; also incompetent (in the PPP’s case), even unpatriotic (in the MQM’s case).
And even while the government in Islamabad has supported the military’s stance on Karachi, the GHQ has not been entirely happy with the federal administration. This became apparent when in November last year, after a meeting of the corps commanders, the ISPR released a statement lamenting the lack of enforcement of various aspects of the NAP. Though some ministers in Islamabad tried to deflect the criticism in the statement towards the government in Sindh, the ISPR’s phrasing was too all-encompassing to be reduced to the failures of civilian administration in a single province.
“The statement was issued only because of the ambivalence of civilian leadership on issues such as terrorism. When politicians leave their job for the military to do, they then have [no moral authority] to complain about the increasing role of the army in civilian territory,” is the rationale Hussain gives.
Like many other analysts in Pakistan, he believes the ISPR statement does not reflect Raheel Sharif’s personal assessment but the viewpoint of the military as an institution. “In the army, the chief may have the final say but he cannot be indifferent to the feelings of his corps commanders. If the corps commanders feel strongly about something, the chief has to convey their feelings to the government,” Hussain explains. On his own, he says, Raheel Sharif is not interested in politics.
Hussain is also willing to give politicians some benefit of the doubt though. Long shadows cast by repeated military coups/military rule have shaped the expectations of civilian leaders about what is permissible, he says. That is an important reason why the military’s influence in civilian affairs endures. “As long as civil institutions remain weak, those with established positions on issues of security and foreign relations will continue to take advantage,” he adds.
If so, it does not really matter what kind of individual Raheel Sharif is when it comes to the military’s interference in civilian affairs. Whether he is interested in politics or not is irrelevant. “I don’t view Raheel Sharif as any different from other army chiefs as far as the military’s vital interests are concerned,” says Shah. Raheel Sharif, like his predecessors, considers it his obligation to do “what he thinks is right regardless of its constitutional or democratic appropriateness.”
Theoretically, no one can disagree with the supremacy of the constitution and the need for a democratic system of government. Not even Musharraf.
Comfortably perched on a Victorian chair in his Karachi sitting room, he is full of praise for Raheel Sharif’s personal and professional conduct before he starts explaining why the general is looming so large on the political horizon. “All rules and the constitution are for Pakistan, not the other way round. I believe that Pakistan is more important than any rules,” Musharraf says emphatically. The army has to step forward and intervene when Pakistan is going under, and no constitutional fixes are available to change the inept civilian leadership, he argues.
The logic of this principle is as simple as it is ominous; will Raheel Sharif, then, also do what Musharraf did in 1999 when he overthrew an elected civilian government?
This was originally published in Herald's Annual 2016 issue as part of Herald Person of the Year section. To read more subscribe to the magazine in print.
Comments (99) Closed
Very much so, a pride of the nation. The only beacon of hope, honesty and integrity in this corrupt society.
This is the problem of Pakistan. An Indian general will never get this type of media publicity. 3 news pieces about him today on the home page of the dawn website.
Raheel has showed real faces of our politicians to nation. He has done this by taking action rather than talking.
I wish my sons to join the army and serve the nation like General Sharif. Salute to his parents and the army.
Very eye opening article. Civilian weak governance issue gives space to military intervention. It is, therefore, the civilian government that is itself is the enemy of democracy, no one else.
Could be? He is already king. Please stop this sham democracy and call a spade a spade. The army is running the country.
@Don I also wondered why an Army General is in the news so regularly. But I think we need to understand that the nation of Pakistan is at a crossroads. It has a rampant corruption problem, a massive terrorism issue - more internal than external, a very tight fiscal state and pressure from various world forces in many forms- for example from Saudi Arabia to participate in war, from India, from USA, even from China. The nation perceives the elected government to be morally corrupt. This is based on my extensive reading of Pakistan-based newspapers and YouTube videos of interviews. Army has always remained the last hope. Hence an Army General has to comment on civil issues. That reassurance is much needed for a nation that is tethering under uncertainty. Indian scene is very different and just not comparable. The Army Chief may in near future transition to a civilian role given his credibility- hence he may be in news often.
He's an Inspiration and a role model for all of us. But I do not agree with the thought that he is the only hope for Pakistan. I am sure we have plenty of Raheel Sharif's in our society, all we need to do is recognise them and provide them the opportunity they deserve. 'Zara Nam Ho to Ye Matti Bari Zarkhez hai Saaqi'.
Pakistan needs to be very careful, and not become a 'hero-worshiping' state, where a person is made into a larger-than-life figure, an indispensable and invincible character who can do no wrong. He has his flaws, like all humans,I'm sure. So admire his performance, character and resolve rather than the personality.
Let him retire.He will disappear like Ayub, Yahya, Zia, Musharraf and Kayani.
@Don not a problem of pakistan. he is a human ..no matter if its a politicians or a army man or abc if someone doing good he will be highlighted.
General Sharief has already made up his mind about what he is going to do after his retirement.He has already enhanced his popularity in a systematic manner by using ISPR .He will be taking such steps which nobody could have dreamt of.One day he will be whole sole of Pakistan.But it will a golden era for pakistan.
Unfortunately, our political class has not yet learnt its lessons. Each time it comes in to govern, both leading parties are interested foremost in enriching themselves above all else. The examples of corrupt ways of ministers, PMs, their families, their friends, parliament members, and so on, could fill an encyclopaedia. Plus, the alleged links to a foreign spy agency, extortion, terrorism, stealing water from citizens in Karachi, stealing electricity from the grid all over the nation, a corrupt judiciary from which justice is not expected, a corrupted police force in Punjab and elsewhere - such glaring examples of the one, endear the other, the armed forces in the eyes of the population. Gen Raheel Sharif, because he has shown true leadership, statesmanship, at a critical time for the country, is being made into nothing less than a saviour. During harsh times, civil society deserves to have such a hero!!
@wellwisher : He will be forgotten only if an ungrateful lot wishes to forget his contributions. He is not Ayub, Yahya or Zia. They did not rule our hearts. General Raheel rules our heart.
raheel sharif is known as good soldier. do not try to instigate or provoke him to take over and cause irreparable loss to the good reputation of his elders. there r few criminals in media and few orphan political parties want him to disregard his oath and conquer this country. even otherwise it is disciplined institution where personalities do not matter.
@Mahmud well said Mahmud sb
I think Media should let him do his job. He is a good General and doing an excellent job, for which he has been trained. We expect no less from Pakistan Armed forces. Every officer and Jawan in Pakistan Armed forces must be highly disciplined individuals, to be able to protect our borders.
Dont hype raheel,Army cannot do anything when it comes to socio economic development of country ,Pakistan has been so many times ruled by military but it does not added any value to it What pakistan need is strong honest effective leadership at executive level
Indeed G Raheel has shown 'selflessness' in the need of the hour where as the civilian government continues to show 'selfishness'. This is the difference between the two institutions!
Great leader. Nation prays and request that he stays 3 more years at least.
We would rally for civilian leaders when we find any and when they will deliver. Until then, Pakistan Army, Zindabad.
He is an angel. Proud of him.
The attitude of pakistani general public towards their ministers has to change..if u dont respect them..obviously they will not respect u..a system should be in place and that should be followed..if u dont like democracy..remove it..and make it a proper miliatry leadership..but anything which is not systemic is flawed..we decide right or wrong on basis of media now days..what happens if media has been controlled..we will form wrong perceptions..just dont let any miliatry general fool u..n destroy ur lives..
@bryan : Very balanced opinion.
Salute to General Raheel Sharif.
General Musharraf's argument is right. All laws and constitution were created to preserve the state. If the state is threatened, constitution and laws can be held in abeyance - if that is the only way to save the state. There is nothing ominous about that argument. Pakistani politicians throughout history have consisted of the privileged classes and they have failed miserably in their duties because all they care about is lining their pockets and those of their family and friends. So do not expect Pakistani masses to have any sympathy for them.
@Mahmud, I am sure Yahya, Ayub and Zia would have ruled hearts during their heyday. Even if Gen. Sharif is very popular today, he may not be so after staying in absolute power like Gen Zia for a number of years. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. We do have an overall leadership crisis as we go back to military every now and then. Not a healthy sign of a nation in modern times and 21st century.
@Mahmood Well said Mahmood, wish corrupt learn a lesson from him.
Brave man.
A new hope? I hope so.
“As long as civil institutions remain weak, those with established positions on issues of security and foreign relations will continue to take advantage,” Very true.
General Raheel would not do what Musharaf did.
But what if the government collapses on its own? In that case, the military may be asked to take over. If the government itself declares the army is successor then the move can not be criticised as a 'dictatorship'. This time the take over may be acknowledged and accepted by all, as inevitable; politically and legally.
If the General wants the chair of the prime minister, then let him leave his uniform and contest elections. What is wrong with winning and taking the chair legitimately?
The Chief, who could be a king, should be a king, and would be a king!
Every talk time there is a talk about an army chief fit to be a king, it reflects a weak democracy. In India, despite having decorated military officers like General Sam Manekshaw, nobody has ever even dreamed about an army takeover. A plethora of problems exist but a military coup is not a solution.
@bryan - This is exactly the issue. Are you saying that a nation of approximately 150 million cannot find one civilian citizen to rule Pakistan ? This goes back to the same paradigm which Pakistan is suffering since independence which is " Army and only the army can rule Pakistan " The media and the public of Pakistan are equally responsible for this. Every other day you have articles after articles reporting about an army general. Unless the population of Pakistan is able to delink army from local politics; the roots of democracy will never be established properly in Pakistan. Every few years later an army man is either brought to rule or does a coup to rule the country and then he systematically erodes whatever little democratic roots that have been established in the country. I feel sorry for the long term future of Pakistan because the populace of Pakistan cannot find one worthy local citizen to rule them and is forced every now and then to find solace in only army and no one else.
If the COAS is the best for nation, then why did he let Musharraf to go, when he is under so many trials? I request General Raheel Sharif to please order the interior minister to bring him back to the country for trial.
@bryan , Couldn't agree more!
When will you all (Pakistani public,politicians,army personal,judiciary etc) learn that no country can survive until its own constitution and law is upheld by all as no one is above them. Pakistan has problems because all of you break the Constitution and law on a regular basis and than you have the audacity to complain.
@bryan Most of the problems, narrated by you, have been created by the Pakistan Army itself.
The analysis are flimsy in this article as it fails to give the reason why the Army doesn't trust the politicians in matters of National security.
Lets assume the military wants to retain control of national security and foreign policy and it rightly should; because the politicians have shown themselves without doubt to be; incompetent, corrupt, nepotists, money launderers, uneducated (hundreds in parliament with fake degrees) and dictatorial.
There is a good reason people of Pakistan don't trust their politicians and would rather put up with a military. Though the army is not perfect it is still a better choice.
Well, you tried to give politicians a defence but army is not preventing them to build institutions. When politicians need army for elections, census, polio vaccine, flood relief activities, earthquake activities, security of politicians and countless other things then they should not complain or try to take driving seat because these are their failures. Recent Chottoo Gang police encounter is a very small example of their incompetence as they politicised the police and even criminals are working as police personnel so what's the point in just beating drums for supremacy of political leaders over the armed forces.
@lkhan I think the army has matured too since it realized that a almost a decade of dictatorship under Musharraf did more harm to the nation and stability than any political leader could ever do. Yes democracy is slow and takes time to evolve but the military understands it has to let things evolve. In the West, people argue that Muslims are only fit to be ruled by dictators, generals or kings but fortunately even Pakistan's dodgy democracy makes it look like a star in the Muslim world. I see so many Muslims now mention Pakistan as a model showing Muslims can have democracy and not like Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Libya or Egypt. I hope that Pakistanis realize the real strength that comes from developing stable democracy. It's going to take more time but let's not make the mistake of worshipping someone like Musharraf or any other general.
Wondering if any one in Pakistan would write and Dawn would print, a similar article on a person who spent his/her life for the rights of the working people of Pakistan.
When has Pakistan not been at a crossroad?
We must stop giving so much coverage to generals.
Democracy takes time to flourish. You cannot tie a person's legs for years and untie them expecting him to immediately win a marathon. With the army acting as overlords does not help.
@ Sterry: Indonesia is the largest Islamic state in the world. It is a democratic, tolerant, law-abiding country with a ton of respect from the comity of nations.
The truth is that the land of the pure has eons to go before it starts on that voyage. The first thing it has got to do is to let go off its uniform-worship.
Pakistan has always looked for a Saladin to ride in and rule like a king, for a knight in shining armor to "rescue" the nation. It seems to be in the blood of pakistanis - hero worship.
General Raheel Sharif is indeed a great commander. And like very body I salute him as well. Non the less I am truly disappointed and sad to see the coverage to such an extent . Enough coverage of the military brass. Their role is what is expected of them and they should be doing that. Glorifying them all the time make them venerable and could be harmful to the nation in the long run.
@Don This because of our corrupt political system. He seems to be the only ray of hope in this chaotic climate in Pakistan. That is not really the case in India. You have a thriving democracy and democratic institutions.
@bryan Is the army's record much better with regards to corruption? Where did the wealth of Ayub and Zia's kids come from? Musharraf was smarter - changed rules and gave millions of dollars worth of land officially to military people - does that make it less corrupt?
Is the army's record of preserving the country's integrity good? No they are solely responsible for separation of Bangladesh and the killing of millions of what was then fellow Pakistanis in East Pakistan.
Who is responsible for the highly radicalized mindset of ordinary Pakistanis - was general Zia a civilian?
Is it normal for army to use air-force to bomb its own citizens as Pakistan armed forces frequently do? Who gave permission to US to fly drones from its own territory and bomb Pakistani civilians? a military dictator. Who took it away? A civilian regime. Who signed up Pakistan for a foreign war in 1979? A military dictator. Who stopped Pakistan from signing up for a foreign war in 2015? A civilian regime.
Raheel Shareef should enter Politics after his retirement.
Do we need another dictator? What is wrong with you and why do you hate democracy?
The article seemingly chooses to ignore the white elephant in the room. The fact that politician really have been looting the country with both hands and then some toes. Had Nawaz Shareef this time round, really worked to improve common men lives. People would have been literally worshipping him and looking for a soldier saviour. The politicians have brought this down on their own selves.
@Don problem is not him or the military's media campaign but the corruption, loot and plunder created by the corrupt politician. Pakistan needed a person like him in this messy time and he has and is delivering the goods. Salute to him.
For its own welfare, Pakistan army does not want to give enough breathing space to civilian leadership forcing them to spend their tenure at the helm gasping for few breath. In this suffocation and frustration, they withdraw from any serious contribution such as building institutions and focusing instead on reelections only.
Quite amusing to see people clapping the failure of their own federal govt & democratic rule in the country and very eager & supportive of a military ruler who is making every effort to keep all under military control including foreign policy. No country could progress with so much of interference in the administration by army. Except Pakistan no country is giving so much of publicity to their Army Chief as compared to federal govt.
@Mahmud Let's stop this hero worshipping. If Raheel thinks he is such a panacea to Pakistan's problems, then let him step into the political realm. Go to the homes of common pakistanis, town meetings, and win their votes the regular way. Time and again military has played this card of being the organized, well disciplined institution in contrast to the circus of our political system. We gave them chances time and again and every time they more than the politicians have failed to fulfill our expectations and failed to raise the economic and political status of Pakistan. Foreign investors hate dictators and any move by military will lead to rapid exit of capital investment that is finally coming under Nawaz rule. Raheel needs to respect the parliament and stop acting like he runs the country. This is a slap in the face of every voter who has not chosen him to represent them and make decisions on their behalf
The proposition is very temping, indeed, to be a King! But COAS is a very sensible and wise person, he will opt to fix the Kingdom without becoming a King!
The greatest problem with a Pakistani is making a hero out of a General. This started with Ayub, Yahya, Zia and Musharf, all were later kicked out. Hope they do not go overboard this time.
You write so well! You have the knack of capturing the nuances of situations.
As mentioned by others here.Hero worship is a dangerous thing.Yes he is right man at the right time.Yes he a great general and professional soldier.But the process of change must go on! He must leave with his head held high and let others take the reigns.We can only hope the new man will have the same attributes as General Sharif.
How can democracy survive in Pakistan with such glorification of military generals? This is in spite of Pakistan losing all its wars and one half of its country!
There can be no excuse for any officer to break his oath to interfere in politics.
Old and same story of this nation. military and democratically elected government fight for supremacy. history has shown military rule never benefited any country. I admire Indian system where civil govt. works without any interference by military. If dictatorship comes again, corruption and injustice increases. Pakistan is very unstable. No permanent solution seen in near future
What an amazing historical perspective. I know the family and the proximity of General Raheel Sharif, and his brother Major Shabbir Sharif, Nishan-e-Haider and their native village. I served in an around Kharian Cantonement and fought the 1971 war in Chhamb-Jurian sector. From his ancestor village to Ladian, to Karianwala, to Tanda to Daulat Nagar to Mandi Bhauddin and the geographical surrounding is the beat that in 9th Division and Sixth Armoured Division and within 25 miles is well on my finger tips. The two brothers are heroes of this passing five decades from 1960's to date.
May Pakistan survive through all the odds that it faces under the General's leadership and fill in for the inept civilian ruler ship.
Knowing General Mushharraf was a pleasure as a young officer, when he was a solid professional army officer Second-in-Command(Major) later rose in ranks and kept on growing until the fall from the pinnacle he had lost all he had built due to greed of power and arrogance.
We love him & he should be the next PM of our country
He is an honourable man as well as an honourable general.His excellent job of controlling terrorists in the north waziristan area is laudatory.He stands apart from his predecessors as he does not want to malign his clean image by dismissing the civilian govt. for reason of rampant corruption among top leaders in the country.I think he is a rare character in Pakistan.
@wellwisher good one
Pakistan army may be a professional outfit but it has failed Pakistani people when it comes to International diplomacy which is purely a civilian foray and not that of the army. It has lost all wars, ceded what is now Bangladesh and lately the failed Kargil operation. Why Pakistan has lost wars is because of diplomatic failure and not because of any other reason. I am surprised that Pakistanis don't have have faith in their power of ballot and look forward to the Army and the Generals for solutions. Its a shame.
I want to meet Gen. Raheel Sharif . Is there any possibility? If so then let me know.
It is very difficult to solve the corruption and hypocrisy culture in Pakistan.The younger generation has grown with this from A TO Z. One man cannot solve it. The nation with its dedicated volunteers from all walks of life will turn this nation around. Take the example of Japan,Korea or even Malaysia. We need dedicated leaders.
Who says we have democracy in Pakistan. We don't. Again and again we put feudal lords in power who use their power to gain all the financial benefits for themselves. They have framed the constitution to favor themselves. As long as the political leadership remains corrupt to the core the military coups will keep on coming. People get so much distraught in few years of political leadership that they celebrate when military takes over.
@bryan Sir, I like your statement. Every Pakistani has to be truthful, love Pakistan and devote our life to our country. We can not depend on other countries.
We, the overseas Pakistanis, love General Raheel Sharif and salute him!
Where there is a will, there is a way. Raheel Sharif is a will and way to revamp Pakistans pride.
Only a brilliant and honest man would bow away from this corrupt system of politics.... while rest would have easily jumped on the opportunity... But General Sahib as much as a difficult task it would have been... You would have led our country well..
Yes, that's why he is great because he could easily be the "King" and have decided not to be.
If our political rulers had delivered, even a little, we would never see someone ch articles.
@ishrat salim100%
@SMI Best Presidential Line. Good choice.
He is a great general nation is very proud of this great general.
@Farukh Bashir Are you certain that the military rulers (who came by breaking the Constitution) were not corrupt and did not put the country in harms way and had no part in breaking the country?
@Dr. Salaria, Aamir Ahmad You mean a dictator?
@Mahmood Some would disagree with that hype.
@Don True. Not only in India but in any self respecting country.
@Jaago Good observation.
@sanjay Agreed . Good analysis and conclusion.
I'm always appalled and wary of nations who make a mere mortal into a larger-than-life, hero and start worshiping him! Hugo Chavez was regarded as the revolutionary and everything revolved around him, And yet now Venezuela - despite its oil wealth - is in dire straights and people are fed up with the lack of food and facilities, with mismanagement. The God-like figure could not address people's basic needs.
And then there was Kadafi, the colorful, spiteful former, deceased leader of Libya, who considered himself invincible. We also have Putins, Erdogans, and Trumps of present day world, who think they can do no wrong, and their word is gospel!
What exactly has Raheel Sharif accomplished for Pakistan or at international stage to deserve such unparalleled deference? Has peace broken out between India and Pakistan? Is Kashmir liberated under Gen. Raheel? Did we repatriate all the Afghan refugees already, or have we stopped all terrorist acts and target killings under his command?
@Syed Chishti "Due to greed of power and arrogance" is the best sentence you wrote that is not limited to Musharraf but fits all the Army Generals (Ayub, Yahya, Zia, Musharraf) who time and again toppled the civilian governments and attempted to hold power until they had to leave.
Gen. Raheel becoming a Field Marshall, without leading a major war and winning it, is like Obama getting the Nobel Peace Prize in his first year - without much accomplishments to brag about, even eight years after the fact!!! Both are illogical and without a foundation.
Consider this. Under Obama more civil war or cross border skirmishes have erupted around the world than during any other previous US administration - except for WWII and the Korean War. More people have been killed due to increasingly higher drone strikes under Obama, than under any other previous US President.
Similarly, more Pakistani soldiers have died on Afghan-Pak, and Indian-Pak borders, during Gen. Raheel's leadership, than under any other Army Chief of Staff, except for events leading up to 1965 and 1971 wars.
I rest my case!
But he is the king. The sort which would remain so forever as he did not sell his soul.
No matter how big any General is. The army belongs in the barracks. General sahab has done proud in extraordinary times but he should have worked more towards reducing the role of army involvement in Pakistani politics.
What a slap to democracy. This obsessed nation has gone nuts, how about we leave military men in their business and not involve them in places where they do not belong. It seems many are blind in terms of seeing the real faces of the ones who 'run' the country. People in general are in a serious need of education and research skills before cooking up a conclusion! The irrationality honestly frustrates me.
Raheel was a good man at the helm of Pak. Army; he did a lot of positive things; mainly trying to cleans the deeply imbedded terrorists (still far from enough. Pakistan has just got to get totally rid of the madrassas that breed venom; and the Mullah's who take over there- after. One thing the general unfortunately did not dabble with; he never or hardly ever gave credence to the poor down cast minorities; where the killings; almost daily; are at the rampage. Yes; I would so love to have my Son; who has all the ingredients; the intelligence; and what's more the loyalty to become a Chief of Staff; unfortunately; he never can make it; is a Christian.
Don't worship personalities but ideas; Don't make any person larger than institution...that won't help any country.
To be honest, Gen Sharif will be remembered in history as the 'chief who made the king'!
@Mahmood.With due respect military and civil government they both have equal share in the down fall of our country. let us appreciate Mr Raheal Shareef for his role against terrorism... let us develop the skill to call spade a spade..folks.. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. ... What country before ever existed a century and half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.