Soldiers engaged in battle speak a different language in tone and tenor than what we get to hear in peace time. This is very well understood by military commanders who realise that their men are undergoing fatigue of war. It is not taken as an expression of disloyalty or threat of a coup. On the contrary, the civilian leadership, particularly those sitting far away from battleground or theatre of war, are often easily confused by these gestures. The removal of General Stanely McChrystal, commander of NATO, is a classic example of such misperception. The US has lost an excellent cog of its war machine. The General had tremendous understanding of the war in Afghanistan which he had crystallized in his signature counter insurgency (COIN) strategy in Afghanistan. A number of Pakistani military officers have actually admired and advocated this strategy to bring peace in FATA. So much for the wisdom of civilian leadership in US that has gone for satisfying personal egos over US national interests.
I fully agree with the desire to control the military generals that all civilian leadership have. But can it be done in Pakistan? My considered opinion is no. Every political party in Pakistan draws its strength not from the people or their voters—they consider the masses stupid—they draw their strength from foreign masters, black money, corrupt bureaucrats, disgruntled lower-level judges or rascals among SHOs of the country’s police. Such political leaderships don’t have the moral courage to stand up to military generals. Politicians who are sincere with their own people, clean in character and draw strength from people will never have any problem controlling men in uniform, no matter how glittery their pips may be. These are the politicians that do not suffer from complexes. They give a vision to their military and their generals make them proud by bringing them a victory. –ATTA RASUL MALIK, Islamabad, June 28