The Door To The Barracks

So what’s the conclusion? Is the army the best medicine for Pakistan?

Regards,

Faruk

Romair,

Zia was indeed from Jullundur--a very Punjabi city in the Indian Punjab. I believe he lived in Peshawar for some years but that certainly doesn`t make him ``from`` the Frontier.

Ayub Khan was indeed a non-Pathan; Hindko speaking, but they ``became`` Pathans and stopped speaking Hindko. However, he was a Tarin Pathan so maybe they were Pashto speaking after all. OR maybe they were Hazaras who called themselves Tarins? Who knows.

Yahya`s family was from Peshawar but they weren`t Pathans. They are Qizilbashi, Farsi speakers from Iran originally.

Lt. Gen. (r) Qadir Baloch is an ethnic Balochi but you are correct, there aren`t that many of them. There were some Sindhi officers in the first few PMA batches but they left the Army pretty early on. One did win the Sword of Honor, though.

Regards.

Fuzair #160: My reference was to Pathans, as well as people from NWFP (non-Pathans). For example, Ayub Khan was from Abottabad. That would make him a non-Pathan, I assume. And, Yahya Khan was born in Chakwal, but was from NWFP. Similarly, I thought, Zia was from Jullundher(?) and considered Peshawar his home (which is why he gave Dilip Kumar a Nishan-e-Pakistan or something similar).

My knowledge of the make-up of individual Regiments, is not too good. I only have info on the overall makeup of the Army. I cannot recall running into a single Baluchi or Sindhi officer in my life. I guess there must have been some, but I didn`t know who they were. Nearly every officer I ran into was Punjabi, Pathan or Muhajir (or Kashmiri)......

Interestingly, the PAF has no concept of Regiments, or ethnic units. You never know who you may run into at what point in which city, in which squadron.....

HP #159: Interesting comments. I agree with most of them. Other than the fact that I have never agreed with the division of Pakistan`s good and bad, along, ``liberal`` and, ``religious`` lines. This is the argument used to define good and bad in Pakistan, and it polarizes the country. The true divisions are along rich and poor lines. Feudal and non-feudal lines. Urban and rural lines. etc.

Being to the left or right of Jinnah`s views is not a valid criteria for national progress either. Valid criterias are economic growth rates, true democracy, law and order, poverty reduction, etc.

Now to your main points:

``1. The army failed to turn itself into a national army due to its complacency.
2. It had interfered in the civilian structure of the country and
3. It has destroyed and then attempted to modify the national aspirations of the people of Pakistan when it never had any mandate to do that.``

1. Kind of. It is a national institutional moreso than any other I can think of in Pakistan. With no ethnic or religious conflicts internally. However, like all institutions, it has little Baluchi and Sindhi presence.

2. Yes

3. Yes. But no more so than any other leadership we have had (other than Jinnah)

Romair:

Zia was not a Pathan or from NWFP, he was a Punjabi.

HP:
Sind Regiment was not established by ZAB but by Zia. You are correct that, in the early years, there were almost no sindhi speakers to be found in the Sind Regiment (its class composition is supposed to be 50% S/Bs (Sindhi/Baluchis) and 50% PMs (Punjabi Musulmans). However, now there is a very large (if not quite 50%) S/B representation in the Sind Regiment. BTW, there are also quite a few Sindhis in other parts of the Army as well. I was in Lahore recently and went out to the Garrison Golf Club a few times. I was quite surprised to see that many of the Baluch Regiment jawans (26 Baluch? Not sure which one it was) doing RP duty and fatigues on the links were actually Sindhis. This is one of the few Baluch Battalions that has nonPunjabis in it.

Also, the NLI is 100% locally recruited. There are no Punjabis, other than officers, in it. I`m not sure of the official class composition of the NLI but there are a lot of Ismailis, as well as Shias (Burushko speaking) and mainly Sunnis (Shina speaking) in it.

Does the army represent the National aspirations of the people of Pakistan?

Again the question is what are the National aspirations of the people of Pakistan?
A tricky question; as it is really hard to put Pakistan National aspirations in simple words.
I will divide the answer in three phases.

1st Phase 1947 to 70:
We may have to really start from 1947, when the Muslim League presented a sort of moderate social agenda with Islamic mustard on top. Generally, people accepted it and for sometime even the former East Pakistan had no problems in getting along with moderate national goals and aspirations. The problem with the east Pakistan started when the struggle for sharing power, led to myopic infighting where west Pakistan tried to hang on to the power and East Pakistan tried to snatch it. E. Pak had numerical majority and in any democratic or even in any civilian power sharing formula, would have wiped out the bureaucrats in Karachi. The babus in Karachi sought army’s help after the first fair election fiasco in E. Pak. When jugtu front won the majority and threatened to take over power in the future national elections. Since 1954 the army had a seat in the national cabinet and mainly the only support babus had in Pakistan. Eventually, the army took over to avoid proposed elections in 1959. Throughout this period nobody ever raised a question about the national agenda of Pakistan. Surprisingly, even the East Pakistan never actually challenged the goals that were set for Pakistan by Jinnah in 1947. The army was also comfortable with that and the Martial Law in 1958 did not attempt to redefine Pakistan’s National aspirations of a moderate to liberal enchilada embellish by religion.
Ayub Khan, co-opted Pakistani feudal or big to mid size land owners as his ruling partner as the army had to have some base in the civil society to effective manage the day to day mundane issues. It also needed to create a façade that so-called most influential economic groups in Pakistan support the army rule.
The nightmare of 1968-70: Ayub Khan went down along with the feudal who were supposed to be all powerful. Gen. Yahya and his group tried to work with the Islamic parties but nobody in the public knew anything about them and the 1970 elections were won by three parties that were actually to the left of Jinnah’s moderate Pakistani goals. To put it in a better perspective we can say that Awami League, PPP and the National Awami Party(wali Khan) in NWFP and Balochistan were from left to left of the center whereas the army itself was more to the right of the center than the center.
All during the Ayub Martial Law and the military govt in the 60s, the people of Pakistan were headed in different direction than the ruling elite could handle.
2nd phase 1972-1979:
While there was a major crisis in Pakistan in 1971, the army was actually cementing its relations with the extreme right in Pakistan. The rightist supported the army action, provided volunteers to help the army. The army in turn provided them arms and literary militarized the right wing in Pakistan. The 1973 constitution in Pakistan was actually more to the left than any other legal bases in Pakistan. That signaled that the PPP and the NAP were looking to lead Pakistan to more liberal goals. That constitution represented the first significant document to show the emerging aspirations of the people for a far liberal Pakistan than the Jinnah envisioned and it was a natural progression.
3rd Phase 1979-Present:
In 1977 the army turned to support from Islamic Parties when it felt that it needed to remove Bhutto from the power. After that the govt. of Zia declared some vague Islamic goals for Pakistan. The actual turned around came when the soviet entered Afghanistan. The Islamic parties provided the ideological base to the army and the army’s US and Saudi supporters to wage a war against the soviets and in turn the army turned the intellectual leadership to the mullah and attempted to redefine the aspirations and goals of Pakistan people in much more orthodox way than it is acceptable to Pakistani people, Who had shown in the first thirty years of Pakistan that they favor moderation and lean more toward liberalism than far right extremism etc.

So we have three phases in which Pakistani national aspirations were defined and redefined. Civilian took Pakistan to a more liberal country but the army to safeguard its own interest dropped it in the lap of the crackpot religious ideologues, who have so far provided only chaos to the country and the army is now trying to extricate itself from the mess of the last 25 years that it helped to create.
IMO, on the National aspirations test the army has failed the people of Pakistan that are moderate and liberal but the army tried to push them to the medieval ideology and helped in destroying the cohesion of population on its national aspirations.
Now there are numerous other plots and subplots and writing about them would require almost writing a book and I have tried to be generic, as I know both of you are as or more familiar with the Pakistani history as I am.
I have raised three issues.
1. The army failed to turn itself into a national army due to its complacency.
2. It had interfered in the civilian structure of the country and
3. It has destroyed and then attempted to modify the national aspirations of the people of Pakistan when it never had any mandate to do that.

I really owe another post as I think there are some redeeming features in the whole story and I have not captured them fully. I will present them, but in the meantime you guys can put forward your thoughts and we can discuss them.

Romair- I will have comments on your post later. I am exhausted right now.

HP #156: I think your reply is correct, if you look at things in purely a theoretical manner. In that sense, the military (Army included) is not national. At least, not fully national.

However, one has to do a comparison, within the boundaries of all institutions of Pakistan. And not in a utopian boundary. Is the Army national, in comparison to the other instituitons? I would say very much so. In fact moreso. Which other institutions in Pakistan are fully national? Even politics is not national. It is dominated by specific ethnic groups, and those too, with distinct financial boundaries.

The ``national``-ness of any institution in Pakistan should be looked at, along two lines: a) ethnic b) financial levels. Let us look at where the military fits in, with regard to this:

a) Ethnic:

Based on whatever I can remember, the Army enlisted class, comes almost completely from Punjab and NWFP (and maybe Kashmir). However, even within these areas, it comes from five districts: Pindi, Jehlum, Chakwal?, Kohat, Mardan?. Hence it is not even a fully Punjab Army. It is a Nothern Punjab and South Eastern NWFP Army.

However, the enlisted class in the military has very little influence in its affairs. It is the officer class that decides everything. The officer class comes from Punjab, NWFP Kashmir, and Urban Sind. Mostly from Punjab and NWFP.

Moreso, in the military, it is actually the person in the COAS who decides everything. Militaries, by design, are dictatorships. The COAS of the Pakistan Army have mostly nbeen non-Punjabis. Ayub, Yahya, Kakar, Zia trace their roots back to some city in NWFP. Musa was Baluchi. Aslam Beg and Musharraf are Muhajirs. In fact, a Punjabi COAS has never implemented Martial Law. And it is the COAS, who decides on these issues, as a dictator. So, non-Punjabi ethnicities can and have regularly risen to the top, and controlled the whole Army, without any problems.

The PAF officer class comes from the pilots ranks, exclusively. And most, or dispropotiionately high number of them are (were?) Pathans. Jamal Khan, Hakimullah, Farooq Feroze Khan(?), Asghar Khan being either Pathans or from NWFP.

The Navy is completely in Karachi, and has a lot of Muhajir influence.

Statistically, I read that 75% of the Army is Punjabi. However 63% of the population of Pakistan is Punjabi. So the numbers are not too far from each other, ratio-wise. If you look at the recruitement into the Army, you will notice it comes from those areas of Punjab which do not have a strong industrial and agricultural base. Jehlum, Chakwal, Pindi are generally barren areas. The agriculture of Pakistan being in Southern Punjab and Northern Sind. Hence, traditionally only those Punjabis are joining the Army, in the enlisted class, who cannot make a living, any other way.

A good example of this is from Karachi. While you will see a high number of Muhajir officers in the miltary. You will not see too many Muhajir enlisted persons. The reason is that anyone in urban Sind can make a much better living, opening up a small corner pan store, than becoming a soldier.

Hence, the military, generally consists of soldiers from areas, where there is education, but no other options for livelihood are available to the people, financially.

From the above discussion, it should be clear that there are two areas that are not represented in the military, at any level: rural Sind and all of Baluchistan. However, name any other institution where anyone from these areas is employed, in large numbers. In fact, forget about the national level, name any place in these provinces themselves, where a common Sindhi or common Baluch has any influence.

These two areas are exclusively controlled by Sindhi feudals and Baluchi tribals. First and foremost, they are to be blamed for the condition of the people there. It is not in there interest for the people there to prosper. Hence the literacy rate of rural Sind is less than 20% and that of Baluchistan is around 10%.

The military tries its best to recruit from all areas of Pakistan, for obvious reasons. I know this from first hand information. There are no height/weight ratios (for officers, at least). One only has to pass physical tests, like running, eyesight etc. Yet the education base of rural Sind and Balushistan is so low, that they cannot compete anywhere in Pakistan.

So, in that sense, Pakistan`s military is not a national military, due to the exclusion of rural Sind and Baluchistan. But it is definitely not by design. And it is no different, in this regard, than any other instituiton in Pakistan. It does, however, include all other ethnic groups - Pathans, Punjabis, Saraikis, Muhajirs, and Kashmiris - in large numbers. All of whom have gone to the top of the military.

The solution to spreading it to non-represented areas, is first and foremost removing the influence of feudals from those areas. Secondly, perhaps, for a brief time, starting an affirmative action program from these areas, where technical skills are not a major requirement. For technical areas, like fighter flying, ship captains etc. it obviously has to be merit.

More on the financial side, later.................

P.S. starting a regiment named after a province is not going to do much. The Army regiments include officers and soldiers from all ethnicities. Not, solely, from the ethnicity the regiment is named after. Bhutto would have been more successful in creating a more national military, had he removed feudalism from Sind, than staring a regiment named after Sind............

re: HP # 156

I will respond after your second post. :)

Ciao

Feroz, Romair,
This may be a long post and if I am unable to finish it tonight I will take one more post. I may still leave same gaps and I know we can discuss them.


I will attempt to define the national army in two broad categories.
1. Does the army represent the National character of a country and
2. Does it represent the national aspirations of the people of a country?

Let’s take the National Character first.
What is Pakistan’s national character?

Pakistan has four legal provinces and almost a fifth province is Azad ilaqa. It has four ethnic communities or may be five, if we take urban Sindh as a separate entity. There are different languages and uneven economic development in different regions.
On the development side Pakistan has emerged as one economic entity though mostly it is the economic cooperation between Karachi and Punjab. The development of national infrastructure such as National highways, National power and Gas grid, have also shown that left out underdeveloped economic regions in smaller provinces can be pulled into the economic structure if the resource distribution issue is settled thru the constitution in Pakistan.
IMO, the bone of contention between the provinces is the distribution of resources and that is where the Pakistan army plays a role and that role tend to tilt towards one province. With that tilt, army maintains a structure of recruitment and grooming of officer cadre from one province. Smaller provinces don’t have adequate representation in the army; and they assume that the army is only guarding the interests of one province. The army also has failed to impress the smaller provinces in recruitment and officer development from the smaller provinces.
Based on the National characteristics of Pakistan alone, we can make a determination that the army has failed the litmus test and it is not a national army as it does not represent the national characteristics of Pakistan. But that would be a hasty call and would amount to ignoring the factors that make the army tilt towards one province.
How do armies recruit? Just a small comparison with the Indian army here would be in order.
Indian army like the Pakistan army was developed by the British. With Brits experience of always having the volunteer army instead of the draft, they earmarked some areas in India for army recruitment. After Independence, the Indian army on prompting from the civilian leaders changed its recruitment system and it now accepts all recruits w/o any height or chest measurement requirement. Still, it draws heavily from one ethnic area but that is gradually changing.

Pakistan Army was never under any civilian pressure to change its structure and since the Generals were comfortable with that, they continued with the British system. They did make some half hearted attempts like the Sindh regiment but they almost never had recruiters who could speak Sindhi too. Same is the case in Balochistan. Some individual officers do come from other provinces but they have to look after the overall interest of the army and not of their area alone.
There is another factor that people tend to ignore. The economic and social conditions of other provinces make it difficult for the army to recruit in the smaller province. In Sindh, the employment is still there though the incomes are going down. Yet the job in the army is not attractive enough. Balochistan is a self contained society where the writ of the tribal leaders is still much more important than a recruiter’s word or an opportunity to make some money thru the army. Other two areas in the north, NWFP and Azad Ilaqa accept army recruitment based on their economic needs.
Now can we fault the army for sticking to the areas for recruitment where it is easier to recruit instead of making an extra effort in areas where people are still reluctant?

IMO, had the army been under the civilian control, it would have made the extra effort. Recall that ZAB forced the army to establish the Sindh Regiment.

Next part:
Does the army represent the National aspirations of the people of Pakistan?

Ferozek #152: ``Another of discussion is that Pakistani society still has a very dated view of the army and most Pakistanis do not even know the inner workings of the army.``

This is true. I have met hardly anyone, outside the military, who actually knows the situation inside. Most people`s views of the Army are based on their views of Ayub Khan and Zia. Though both were from very middle class backgrounds, the former grew to become a aristratic-like individual with family members married into the high feudal ranks. The later joined in with the maulvis.

So people consider the whole Army to be either rich aristocrats, or maulvis. This is furthust from the truth of the real Army.

``You mentioned that intellectual elites hate the army and HP mentioned a need to turn the elities away from the army. HP also mentioned that elites need the army to secure its interests.``

There is a different between intellectual elites and elites. The elites are the feudal politicians, rich businessmen etc., like BB and NS. They have needed and used the Army to obtain their interests. The intellectual elites are the English-speaking non-feudal, non-businessman, educated upper-middle class crowd, i.e. parents of everyone on Chowk. The newspaper editors, poets, expats etc. They have always looked down upon the Army.

re: HP # 153

If I am missing the point, then pray tell me what is the point? :)

It seems that your idea of a national army is different from mine. My idea about the characteristics of the Pakistani army and its national identifying traits, are similar to Romair`s explanation. Pakistani army does have a national representation through the recruitment from the different provinces and granted that though Punjab dominates this process, it does not lessen the overall nationalistic make up of the army. The question of recruitment ratios from the provinces can be debated. Still, the army does represent Pakistan and its tilt towards Punjab is simply due to the fact that the province has been a traditional source of cannon fodder for Pakistani army like it was for the British Indian Army of the Raj fame.

The only way this error or oversight can be corrected is through a different means of recruitment, but what that new system will be, I have not the slightest idea. HP, if your contention was to show the disparity in the provincial recruitment, then how can you avoid that issue? If the army will not recruit from its traditional areas, where it is supposed to recruit from? On the other hand, and please correct me if this is the wrong impression, but are you suggesting a quota system for the army`s recruitment policies? My friend, the quota system in Pakistan is an evil of untold porportions and is nothing more than a weak reason to deny the right of merit. Such a system in the Pakistani bureaucracy, though meant to address the ``concerns of smaller provinces`` was always used for political reasons and it was an employment scam by which politicans would keep their election promises of finding jobs for their supporters. This system was also abused by the military, when it filled the civilian bureaucracy jobs with retired military personel.

I hope this is not what you are suggesting that the army should use a quota system for its recruitment, so it can have a national representation.

If you are suggesting that national army reprents the social, political and economic demographics of Pakistan, then there is some truth to your statement, because it does to a significant extent. The army in Pakistan is in a process of changing and it has changed greatly since 1947. From 1947 to 1972 its officer corps mostly came from feudal familes and after 1972, there was infusion of middle class people, which made it more representative of the nation, but not enough. Then the period of Zia-ul-Haq saw an overt Islamization of the army in its junior ranks, but that process was aborted by the death of Zia and his cohorts in 1988. Under Musharraf the army is moving back to the its ``pukkah sahib`` traditions.

The army has always reflected the national mood and its internal changes have been commeasurate with the national changes. The army`s character is based on Pakistani character and it cannot escape this link. The fact to be remembered is that despite the fringe element in the army, the army as an institution has been able to maintain its moderation and in that sense, it does represent Pakistan nationally, because Pakistan and Pakistanis are generally moderate in their outlooks. I am not denying the extermists in our middle and I am not denying that they pose a very serious and credible threat, but I am stressing the fact that they represent minority. The extermists are, themselves, a small minority and within this small group, there is another minority and these are the fundlementalists.

I am looking forward to your post! :)

Ciao

Romair and Feroz,

Sorry just did not get enough time to post a reply to Romair. I will do that as soon as I can. However, you both are missing the point about the National Army and that has nothing to do with big 26 or big one. Nor it has anything to do with who is running the army. A national army is the one that has a National character in the context of the whole country. It doesn’t matter where the top brass is from. Hopefully, I will post something on this tomorrow.
Thanks.

re: Romair # 151

Thanks for your reply and there is much weight in your conclusions and I do tend to agree with you that the army is middle class and as to the class dislikes of the army, personal bias and perception of the classes plays an important role. Another of discussion is that Pakistani society still has a very dated view of the army and most Pakistanis do not even know the inner workings of the army. In the past, I have been hauled over the coals but I still maintain what I said then and that is, in its inner workings the army is not only the most organized institution, but it is also the most consensus oriented organization in Pakistan.

The Group of Twenty-Six, as you called them, all work on the principle of a common agreement. The fact that the army does not break ranks, gives it added influence and the reason is that its leadership is loyal to the idea of institutional cohesion unlike its civilian counterparts.

On another point, there seems to be a contradiction in HP`s and your statement. You mentioned that intellectual elites hate the army and HP mentioned a need to turn the elities away from the army. HP also mentioned that elites need the army to secure its interests. If both of you are correct, it would suggest that there is a love-hate relationship between the elites and the army in Pakistan. Is that a reasonable conclusion?

Ciao

Ferozek/HP #150/148: ``Romair, if you are reading this, would you care to comment on HP`s question (in post #148) about the Pakistani army and its societal characterizations?``

``Lastly, if you get a chance to think and write about it: where do we place the Pak Army in over all Pakistani society? Is it a National army or the party of usurpers? I think once it is determined that it is not a national army, all struggles by the smaller provinces become legal even when it leads to separation from Pakistan.``

The Pakistan Army, in the overall society, is actually still quite respected. The only groups that hate it are the elite intellectuals and the nationalists from the smaller provinces. The former dislike it because of its alliances with the maulvis during the Zia regime. The later hate it because of its Punjabi dominance.

It is now a very middle class to lower-middle class organization of urbanites. Hence the taxi-driver, shopkeeper, janitor, etc. are ok with it, because they all have a son or nephew in it. I say this based on surveys, and through my personal experiences.

One can divide the military into three parts, and those three parts into a furthur two each. The two divisions are along the officers and enlisted categories. And the three divisions are along the Army, PAF and Navy lines. Each of the six have different characteristics and ethnic make-up.

The enlisted in the Army are from rural areas, with a minimum amount of education. They fall under the poor somewhat-educated category, i.e the oppressed category of Pakistan. That would probably be around 90%(?) of the workforce of the Army. Maybe more. They come from five districts in Pakistan. Three in Northern Punjab (Jehlum, Pindi, Attock) and two in adjacent NWFP (Mardan, Kohat).

The officer class comes from urban NWFP, urban Punjab and urban Karachi. So Baluchistan and rural Sind are unrepresented, as ethnic groups. This class to the ranks of Lt. Col., is very middle class, and living hand to mouth, by standards of educated professionals.

So the above two groups can barely feed themselves, much less usurp, anything.

As a whole, I found the military, to be the only place in Pakistan which was basically free of ethnic and religious divisions. Or even financial divisions. Christians, Ahmedis etc. feel far more secure in the military than in Pakistan`s civil society. And their is no ethnic violence of any sort. Rich and poor officers live in the same neighborhoods. A Muhajir General has been commanding the Army, now, for a while, and has been firing Punjabis left and right, without problem. And I have seen Christian and Ahmedis retired COs get treated like VIPs when they return to their units for reunions.

The powerful group in the Army starts from Brigadier upwards. Actually really from Maj. General upwards. There are 100 Maj. Gens. and 25 Lt. Gens. Commanded by 1 General. This group of the top 26 actually decide the direciton of the Army. Everyone else follows, in a very disciplined manner. This group also runs Pakistan, from the background. It is so powerful because it is the only united group in Pakistan, which never breaks it ranks. The judiciary, politicians, beaurecrats, break ranks, all the time.

This group can at any one time, have representations from any ethnicity (except Baluchi and rural Sindhi, since they are not in the Army to begin with). However, its loyaltites are always towards the Army, not towards its ethnicity. And it ensures that the Army stays involved in power, because it allows this group to gain a lot of benefits (jobs, plots, businesses etc.).

I hope this answers your questions, about the make-up of the Army.

The top command runs the whole Army (like all Armies of the world). And that changes regularly, as Generals retire. So all these points about opening fronts against the Army are baseless and useless, if you ask me. The Army is not one monolithic institution. It would be the equivalent of Baluchis and Sindhis (not in the Army) opening up a front against Pathans, Punjabis and Muhajirs (all in the Army). Is a Musharraf-led Army with 20 Punjabi Lt. Gens. a Muhajir Army or a Punjabi Army? Is a Kakar led Army with 15 Muhajir Lt. Gens. a Pathan Army or a Muhajir Army or a Punjabi Army?

Muhajir civilians fighting an Army run by a Muhajir General (whose whole family is Muhajir civilan) serves no one`s ethnic or separatist purpose. Just like Pathan tribals fighting Pathan soldiers under the command of a Pathan corps commander (who may himself be from tribal areas), serves no one purpose, either. The Pathan corps comander may well be the only person in his family in the Army, with the rest of his extended family, being Pathan civilians......His brother maybe an MNA supporting the tribals.....

So the Army is made up of individuals who were civilians, at one point, and whose families are all civilians. How can someone divide them along us vs. them lines.......

If the top positions of the military were restricted to Punjabis only, such arguments would make sense. However, they rotate on the basis of merit. To the point that individuals of non-Punjabi ethnicity have commanded the Army far more than their ratios in the Army. And have never complained of any ethnic bias.

The issues with the Army are at a national level, and not at an ethnic level.

The separatist problem is the large size of Punjab, as a province. If people want to open up fronts, that is who they should be targeting, and asking for its breakup into three parts. The moment Punjab is broken into three or so pieces, all issues of nationalistic provincial groups will be resolved. Getting the Army out of politics is a different story. But that is a national issue, and will require the civilian population having more faith in political leaders, than in the Army leaders. That will only happen, when the BB, NS, Zardari lot of politicians are history and replaced by more credible ones.

Until that time, the Army will be able to take over the country, whenever it wants, without any problem. This is true in all countries.................

re: Romair

Romair, if you are reading this, would you care to comment on HP`s question (in post #148) about the Pakistani army and its societal characterizations?

Ciao

re: HP # 148

The joke was funny! :)

To be honest with you, I have not thought too much upon the question of the Pakistani army within the context of Pakistani society. I have also seen it as another political party in Pakistan, but more organized and more effective than other main stream national political parties. In fact, I think that Romair would be better placed to answer that question. It is hard to say, whether the Pakistani army is a national army or an army of a particular province. The truth is questionable, but the perception of the situation would strongly hint towards a pro-Punjab bias in the army.

We can debate the value or manner of the reforms in the judicary, but the fact remains that there is a drastic need for reforms in the judicary. I do not favor the present system of three year tenure for the judges and I am of the opinion that judgeship has to be for life and if that option is not possible, then the judges in Pakistan must stand for elections and we can limit their terms of office. Again, this suggestion brings us to the original sin that since elections are tainted in Pakistan, how can we assure of a fair elections to elect the judges. On the other hand, if we do opt for life long tenure for the judges, there will be a few bad apples but the process, if allowed to run its course, will vet them.

HP, there is no immediate or instant solution to Pakistan`s problems. That is why, I favor a creation of a process, which over a period of time corrects the problems, but also offers a sense of procedures by which to deal with the problems. I have no problems with nationalism of the provinces, but nationalism based on the ideas of a provincialism is fraught with peril and it will always cause havoc in the federation. Granted that Islamabad has not always helped the situation, but the provinces themselves are not beyond the pale of sin in fermenting political problems using the provincial nationalism as guise for political opportunties.

Ciao