“Kowtowing” refers to an act of excessive submission, originally from a Chinese custom of kneeling and touching the head to the ground.
Pakistan has a history of enduring recurrent cycles of humiliations and concessions under external pressures.
On September 22, during a the course of the 1965 Indo-Pakistan War, Field Marshal Ayub Khan’s foreign minister, ZA Bhutto made the following statement before the UN Security Council:- “I have the honour to transmit the following message from the President of Pakistan, which I have just received from Rawalpindi- ” I have issued the following order to Pakistan armed forces. They will stop stop fighting as from 1205 hours West Pakistan time today. As from that time they will not fire on enemy forces unless fired upon, provided the Indian Government issues similar orders to its armed forces”
No surprise there. The US had cut off all aid and military supplies to Pakistan. Earlier, fearing Western displeasure, Ayub Khan spurned all suggestions of Pakistan acquiring nuclear capability; he had also refused to take military action in Kashmir during the 1962 Sino-Indian War, thereby missing a unique opportunity to liberate Kashmir.
Yahya Khan’s pursuit of the flesh, farcical shenanigans and crass blunders are too well-known and too well-documented to need repeating. The consequential breakup of Pakistan says it all.
Indian army’s occupation of the Siachen Glacier in 1984 had elicited a dismissive response from General Zia ul Haq- “There is not a blade of grass growing there,” he said. Obviously, regaining the Siachen Glacier was not on the US agenda. In the aftermath of the 1999 Kargil Conflict, a complete military withdrawal was effected under US pressure.
General Syed Asim Munir has emerged as the avenger of our long catalogue of national humiliations.
In 1999, Abhinandan, the captured Indian pilot, was repatriated within hours after PM modi had threatened to use force against Pakistan.
The recent sharp escalation between India and Pakistan immediately after the Pahalgam incident marks a major shift in Pakistan’s traditional response to international pressures: General Syed Asim Munir, the then Chief of the Army Staff has emerged as the avenger of our long catalogue of national humiliations. His sheer courage, decisive and prompt actions against terrorism, Afghan and Iranian armed strikes against Pakistan, and latterly, the Indian aggression, have firmly established his reputation as our national redeemer. It appears that the Chanakyan calculations and Hindutva mind have misjudged him to their national detriment.
The Field Marshal has put India and the Zionists, and the world on notice, by actions, that any threat of force or use of force against the integrity and sovereignty of Pakistan will be met promptly, decisively and effectively. Pakistan has had the capacity to respond for quite sometime now. Today it has the will to respond.
Pakistan is facing immense challenges, both internally and externally. The economy needs structural reforms. Corruption and nepotism are rife and increasing exponentially. Political stability has to be restored. Most of the constitutional institutions have been rendered dysfunctional. The proverbial bureaucratic system is not working. The judiciary ranks amongst the lowest of the low. It’s moral authority and public legitimacy are in shambles. Most of our civilian leadership is mired in personal and parochial interests. They have failed in the past and are just not capable of delivering now or in the near future. One of the redeeming qualities of Prime Minister Shabaz Sharif is his unique ability to work in sync with the armed forces. No other Prime Minister in the history of Pakistan is even remotely capable of such an extraordinary feat.
Pakistan needs to be pulled back from the brink of an abyss. The recently appointed Field Marshal has a monumental task at his hands. He and his institution are fully functional and have delivered at a most critical moment in our nation’s recent history. They had and have a large reservoir of public faith and support.
Time is propitious for a man of his iron will and strategic vision. In 1965 and 1971 China lacked the necessary industrial base and technological development to offer much to Pakistan. During the Kargil crisis, China needed self restraint. In the 1999 Balakot standoff, China was firmly for regional and international peace and stability. The point was to de-escalate. The euphemistic “quartet” of the US, UK, Canada and Australia was a matter of concern for the Chinese but there was no reaction.
The “Trump Tariff War” has now freed China from its self imposed restraints. The consequences are seismic: economically, politically and militarily. Today China has an overwhelming industrial base, technological innovation and advancement, and the political will to assert its rightful weight. In the Field Marshal, China sees the right leader for a strategic partnership. Our alliance with China now somewhat resembles Israeli alliance with the US.
The heirs of the Middle Kingdom think and act strategically. Sino-Pak-Afghan-Bangladesh alignment is emerging. It will embrace many more regional states. There are immense opportunities, economic and military.
What of democracy and the rule of law? The factual answer is that anything closely resembling democracy and the rule of law had and has alluded Pakistan thus far. We have had “elected” authoritarian governments. The judiciary mostly lacks competence, impartiality and, public and moral legitimacy.
Tyranny in archaic Greece was without the negative connotations associated with it in modern world. It was popular, worked for the public good and had replaced monarchy. It was a transitional order, a precursor to the advent of Athenian democracy. Similarly, dictatorship in Ancient Rome meant a temporary magistrate with extraordinary powers only in times of grave military or internal crisis. The dictator’s term was set at six months or as soon as the crisis passed, whichever was shorter. In the modern world, tyranny and dictatorship connote illegitimate seizure of power and an authoritarian rule outside the realm of democracy, constitution, the rule of law and accountability. Such state of affairs were the norm during “elected” governments and extra- constitutional regimes. Such, such have been the plight of nation. I am not advocating tyranny or still less dictatorship but for a country such as Pakistan, facing existential crises from far and near, a national consensus on the integrity and sovereignty of Pakistan is warranted.
The writer is a lawyer who can be reached at [email protected]