A leader is dealer In hope. Napoleon Bonaparte
De-listing Mullah Omerfrom FBI's list unravels the upcoming foreign strategy of US for Af-Pak region. Are Pakistani leaders are capable enough to harness the rapidly changing geo-political situation in the interest of theirnation? Unequivocally, since the second world war US had aptly strategised their policies with the morphing political situation of the region. Irrespective of the regional political sentiments US has achieved much of their objectives. Fall of USSR and getting Osama bin Ladin are the significant and enough laurels for US to be proud of. In the larger interest of their hegemonic motives so far US strategies had work really well for themselves. On the otherhand the local stake holders in this equation hasn't achieved any thing at all for past fifty years. Either it is Pakistan or Afghanistanboth countries are facing the same old challenges in 2012.Inept and vacuousness of political and military leadersare mainly to be blamed for present circumstances these nations are facing.
In 1960s, military leadership of Pakistan had felt like over the moon by getting carpeted well-come in Washington. This psychological therapy from Washington worked really well eventually making Pakistani military leadership elated about the supposedly “Good”friend they got. Soon after ,self proclaimed field marshal, Mr.Ayub's convictions and understanding about the relationship was “Friends not Masters”. Infact in this competing world of nations battling for survival doesn’t leave any roam for any kind of master and slave relationships. Whoever has a power and authority to subjugate will do so for their own survival. Therefore the relationships are also defined and created to suite.
During 1970's and 80s despite being socialist and islamist leaders the miseries of the poornation were on rise. Twenty years after the inception the nation felt like betrayed with their megalomaniac leadership. Bhutto and Mujeeb brilliantly and successfully tapped the mass sentiment and rallied youth with their socialist mantra. Though being an idealogical harmony between nation, leadership failed to keep them united.Merely after 24 years nation got the gift “Fall of Dhaka” for their silver jubilee celebrations. The nation geographically dividedby India eventually fell by the decisions of “ingenious acumen”of military including political leadership, people have trusted in 1971 elections. These very leaders not only failed on the foreign and defence policy front but record shows that internal policy was in complete mess. 1977's military coup managed prevailing national discontent. Nations immediate reaction and negligible political reaction after Bhutto is an evidence of sigh of relief. Mr. Zia-Ul-Haq , an Islamist, aligned with US for various economic and security reasons couldn't deliver any miracle for Pakistan.
1990s turbulent timesof power struggle in Islamabad's corridors left this country intatters. Left and right wing political forces along with militarybrought this country into more grimmer situation. The musical chairgame of these inept leaders resulted in astronomical inflation and poverty. The insatiable hunger for authority and power tussle resulted in a militaristic fate for next decade. Mr. Musharraf,leader once again deciding the fate of this country had already two miserable defeats in his account (Supporting Taliban, Cargil adventure ). Newton proposed law “Every action has a reaction” so does happened with dear homeland. During 1980's and 90's many young people were sent across the boarder to be killed in the name of Islam and Taliban. After 2001, own country became a new battleground. Exported jihad was now an import commodity.All new strategies once again backfired resulted in 40,000 casualties of fellow-men by fellow-men. External forces achieved much with minimal cost for their nations leaving Pakistani megalomaniac leader elated.
New decade of new century stumbled this very nation to a deja vu discontent, a feeling their previous generation had felt few decades ago. Their chosen leader hasn't been able to materialise their dreams. Will the new man, Imran khan,--youth of this age are looking up, will be able to full-fill their aspirations? Previously, nation has trusted many time their leaders as they are doing today.All historical leadership has failed. Will this time the trust between the nation and leadership with be restored? Remains a big question.
De-listing Mullah Omerfrom FBI's list unravels the upcoming foreign strategy of US for Af-Pak region. Are Pakistani leaders are capable enough to harness the rapidly changing geo-political situation in the interest of theirnation? Unequivocally, since the second world war US had aptly strategised their policies with the morphing political situation of the region. Irrespective of the regional political sentiments US has achieved much of their objectives. Fall of USSR and getting Osama bin Ladin are the significant and enough laurels for US to be proud of. In the larger interest of their hegemonic motives so far US strategies had work really well for themselves. On the otherhand the local stake holders in this equation hasn't achieved any thing at all for past fifty years. Either it is Pakistan or Afghanistanboth countries are facing the same old challenges in 2012.Inept and vacuousness of political and military leadersare mainly to be blamed for present circumstances these nations are facing.
In 1960s, military leadership of Pakistan had felt like over the moon by getting carpeted well-come in Washington. This psychological therapy from Washington worked really well eventually making Pakistani military leadership elated about the supposedly “Good”friend they got. Soon after ,self proclaimed field marshal, Mr.Ayub's convictions and understanding about the relationship was “Friends not Masters”. Infact in this competing world of nations battling for survival doesn’t leave any roam for any kind of master and slave relationships. Whoever has a power and authority to subjugate will do so for their own survival. Therefore the relationships are also defined and created to suite.
During 1970's and 80s despite being socialist and islamist leaders the miseries of the poornation were on rise. Twenty years after the inception the nation felt like betrayed with their megalomaniac leadership. Bhutto and Mujeeb brilliantly and successfully tapped the mass sentiment and rallied youth with their socialist mantra. Though being an idealogical harmony between nation, leadership failed to keep them united.Merely after 24 years nation got the gift “Fall of Dhaka” for their silver jubilee celebrations. The nation geographically dividedby India eventually fell by the decisions of “ingenious acumen”of military including political leadership, people have trusted in 1971 elections. These very leaders not only failed on the foreign and defence policy front but record shows that internal policy was in complete mess. 1977's military coup managed prevailing national discontent. Nations immediate reaction and negligible political reaction after Bhutto is an evidence of sigh of relief. Mr. Zia-Ul-Haq , an Islamist, aligned with US for various economic and security reasons couldn't deliver any miracle for Pakistan.
1990s turbulent timesof power struggle in Islamabad's corridors left this country intatters. Left and right wing political forces along with militarybrought this country into more grimmer situation. The musical chairgame of these inept leaders resulted in astronomical inflation and poverty. The insatiable hunger for authority and power tussle resulted in a militaristic fate for next decade. Mr. Musharraf,leader once again deciding the fate of this country had already two miserable defeats in his account (Supporting Taliban, Cargil adventure ). Newton proposed law “Every action has a reaction” so does happened with dear homeland. During 1980's and 90's many young people were sent across the boarder to be killed in the name of Islam and Taliban. After 2001, own country became a new battleground. Exported jihad was now an import commodity.All new strategies once again backfired resulted in 40,000 casualties of fellow-men by fellow-men. External forces achieved much with minimal cost for their nations leaving Pakistani megalomaniac leader elated.
New decade of new century stumbled this very nation to a deja vu discontent, a feeling their previous generation had felt few decades ago. Their chosen leader hasn't been able to materialise their dreams. Will the new man, Imran khan,--youth of this age are looking up, will be able to full-fill their aspirations? Previously, nation has trusted many time their leaders as they are doing today.All historical leadership has failed. Will this time the trust between the nation and leadership with be restored? Remains a big question.
No comments:
Post a Comment