PTI freedom movement against Judiciary and Establishment: News, Discussion & Updates
- Thread starter Cash gk
- Start date
- Status
agidest
Registered Member
You're not presenting both sides of the argument.
Pro: Pakistan has also achieved positive outcomes through allowing its top military brass to freely go/work for Arab countries.
Pakistan, as part of unstated policy, has relied on its military generals both during service and after retirement to go to Arab countries to increase its influence in those countries. And the outcome has been very favourable until recently. Till the time Arab countries relied on oil, they were focused on military and security, this worked out great for Pakistan.
Con: Pakistani generals and military have been compromised and the culture of such positions makes Pakistani military open to being influenced individually, compromising Pakistan's national security and information security.
However Pakistan lost influence in the last decade as GCC has pivoted more towards focusing on economic dynamism as oil revenues will no longer serve GCC in the future.
Potentially, as the pros have reduced, it might be time to re-evaluate the policy.
To be fair, most other countries do not allow this and there are good reasons not to. But Pakistanis are best place to judge on this.
Cash gk
Elite Member
- Thread starter
- #1,732
Countries gain respect from others when they show respect for their own citizens. When a government undermines the people’s mandate by manipulating votes, restricts the right to protest, or installs leaders with only 17 seats while ignoring the party that won a two-thirds majority, it loses credibility. If a nation does not uphold its citizens’ rights, it cannot expect respect from other countries. Sending unqualified representatives only exposes these failures, as people see through the lack of integrity. Even if you send prominent figures, people recognize the reality of a country that is morally compromised and led by corrupt individuals. Respect cannot be achieved when citizens are kidnapped in broad daylight and judicial decisions are disregarded.
Cash gk
Elite Member
- Thread starter
- #1,735
Since its inception, Pakistan has struggled to shape its policies independently, often caught between the political ambitions and strategic interests of foreign powers. This influence is particularly evident in the sway held by Washington and Riyadh, whose control over Pakistan’s political and military landscape restricts the country’s ability to act autonomously. Through loans, strategic alliances, and influence over political appointments, these powers have consistently shaped Pakistan’s domestic and foreign policies.
The notion of external powers manipulating a nation’s policies is not new. Colonial powers such as Britain and France used political and economic control to dominate various regions, often by installing local leaders who would follow their mandates. Pakistan’s journey has been similar, though it has experienced this influence from modern superpowers like the United States and key allies like Saudi Arabia.
Since Pakistan’s independence, the United States has viewed it as a strategic ally, especially during the Cold War and in the subsequent War on Terror. However, this alliance has come with a price. American support for Pakistan’s military regimes and various governments has meant that Washington’s interests have often dictated Pakistan’s policy decisions. A pivotal moment was the aftermath of 9/11, when the then-U.S. President George W. Bush famously declared, “You’re either with us, or you’re against us,” pressuring Pakistan to join America’s war in Afghanistan. Pakistani generals allowed the U.S. military to use airbases within Pakistan, facilitating attacks on Afghanistan. This decision had lasting consequences, as the influx of arms and the destabilising effects of warfare spilt over into Pakistan, damaging its social fabric and economic system. This was a repetition of history; during the Soviet-Afghan war, Pakistan was similarly coerced into becoming a frontline state, with far-reaching consequences that Pakistan has struggled to recover from.
More recently, former Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan’s removal from office in 2022 raised suspicions of American involvement, especially given Khan’s efforts to strengthen ties with Russia. Khan’s attempt to participate in the Kuala Lumpur Summit in 2019 alongside the Malaysian and Turkish presidents was also thwarted by Pakistan’s military under pressure from Saudi Arabia, further underscoring the extent of foreign influence on Pakistan’s policies.
Saudi Arabia has been another major player in Pakistan’s political sphere. Given Pakistan’s economic struggles, Saudi financial aid and oil subsidies have often been lifelines for the country. However, these benefits come with strings attached. Riyadh expects loyalty in return, influencing Pakistan’s foreign policy decisions. For instance, Saudi Arabia reportedly pressured Pakistan to discourage Imran Khan from attending the Kuala Lumpur Summit, which Riyadh saw as a challenge to its leadership in the Muslim world.
This control goes beyond financial leverage. Saudi-funded religious schools in Pakistan promote ideologies aligning with Riyadh’s interests, embedding Saudi influence within Pakistan’s cultural and religious institutions. Additionally, Saudi Arabia’s influence has repeatedly led Pakistani leaders to travel to Riyadh, seeking approval or support, such as Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s recent visit to Saudi Arabia.
Nawaz Sharif’s recent visit to Washington and Shehbaz Sharif’s visit to Riyadh highlight the ongoing nature of this dependency. These visits underscore how Pakistan’s political leaders often seek approval or guidance from foreign capitals before making critical decisions. The reliance on Washington and Riyadh for financial aid and political backing reveals a power dynamic where Pakistan’s leaders are often bound to follow the agendas set by these capitals.
Economic dependency has cemented the influence of Washington and Riyadh over Pakistan. The United States and Saudi Arabia have provided Pakistan with significant financial aid and loans over the years, creating a cycle of dependency. The IMF, which the U.S. heavily influences, also plays a role as Pakistan’s economic stability is often tied to IMF loans. This dependency extends to military appointments; former ISI chief General Hameed Gul once remarked that no army chief could be appointed without approval from Washington and Riyadh, reflecting how deeply foreign influence permeates Pakistan’s power structures.
Pakistan’s struggle for sovereignty remains compromised by the grip of Washington and Riyadh. Events from the 9/11 aftermath to the recent visits of Pakistan’s leaders to these capitals underscore the enduring nature of this control. Pakistan’s policies, military appointments, and even foreign relations are frequently shaped by the interests of these foreign powers. As long as Pakistan remains economically and politically reliant on external aid and approval, it will continue to be bound by the influence of these two capitals, unable to move forward independently or secure its place on the world stage.
The notion of external powers manipulating a nation’s policies is not new. Colonial powers such as Britain and France used political and economic control to dominate various regions, often by installing local leaders who would follow their mandates. Pakistan’s journey has been similar, though it has experienced this influence from modern superpowers like the United States and key allies like Saudi Arabia.
Since Pakistan’s independence, the United States has viewed it as a strategic ally, especially during the Cold War and in the subsequent War on Terror. However, this alliance has come with a price. American support for Pakistan’s military regimes and various governments has meant that Washington’s interests have often dictated Pakistan’s policy decisions. A pivotal moment was the aftermath of 9/11, when the then-U.S. President George W. Bush famously declared, “You’re either with us, or you’re against us,” pressuring Pakistan to join America’s war in Afghanistan. Pakistani generals allowed the U.S. military to use airbases within Pakistan, facilitating attacks on Afghanistan. This decision had lasting consequences, as the influx of arms and the destabilising effects of warfare spilt over into Pakistan, damaging its social fabric and economic system. This was a repetition of history; during the Soviet-Afghan war, Pakistan was similarly coerced into becoming a frontline state, with far-reaching consequences that Pakistan has struggled to recover from.
More recently, former Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan’s removal from office in 2022 raised suspicions of American involvement, especially given Khan’s efforts to strengthen ties with Russia. Khan’s attempt to participate in the Kuala Lumpur Summit in 2019 alongside the Malaysian and Turkish presidents was also thwarted by Pakistan’s military under pressure from Saudi Arabia, further underscoring the extent of foreign influence on Pakistan’s policies.
Saudi Arabia has been another major player in Pakistan’s political sphere. Given Pakistan’s economic struggles, Saudi financial aid and oil subsidies have often been lifelines for the country. However, these benefits come with strings attached. Riyadh expects loyalty in return, influencing Pakistan’s foreign policy decisions. For instance, Saudi Arabia reportedly pressured Pakistan to discourage Imran Khan from attending the Kuala Lumpur Summit, which Riyadh saw as a challenge to its leadership in the Muslim world.
This control goes beyond financial leverage. Saudi-funded religious schools in Pakistan promote ideologies aligning with Riyadh’s interests, embedding Saudi influence within Pakistan’s cultural and religious institutions. Additionally, Saudi Arabia’s influence has repeatedly led Pakistani leaders to travel to Riyadh, seeking approval or support, such as Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s recent visit to Saudi Arabia.
Nawaz Sharif’s recent visit to Washington and Shehbaz Sharif’s visit to Riyadh highlight the ongoing nature of this dependency. These visits underscore how Pakistan’s political leaders often seek approval or guidance from foreign capitals before making critical decisions. The reliance on Washington and Riyadh for financial aid and political backing reveals a power dynamic where Pakistan’s leaders are often bound to follow the agendas set by these capitals.
Economic dependency has cemented the influence of Washington and Riyadh over Pakistan. The United States and Saudi Arabia have provided Pakistan with significant financial aid and loans over the years, creating a cycle of dependency. The IMF, which the U.S. heavily influences, also plays a role as Pakistan’s economic stability is often tied to IMF loans. This dependency extends to military appointments; former ISI chief General Hameed Gul once remarked that no army chief could be appointed without approval from Washington and Riyadh, reflecting how deeply foreign influence permeates Pakistan’s power structures.
Pakistan’s struggle for sovereignty remains compromised by the grip of Washington and Riyadh. Events from the 9/11 aftermath to the recent visits of Pakistan’s leaders to these capitals underscore the enduring nature of this control. Pakistan’s policies, military appointments, and even foreign relations are frequently shaped by the interests of these foreign powers. As long as Pakistan remains economically and politically reliant on external aid and approval, it will continue to be bound by the influence of these two capitals, unable to move forward independently or secure its place on the world stage.
Cash gk
Elite Member
- Thread starter
- #1,736
Since its inception, Pakistan has struggled to shape its policies independently, often caught between the political ambitions and strategic interests of foreign powers. This influence is particularly evident in the sway held by Washington and Riyadh, whose control over Pakistan’s political and military landscape restricts the country’s ability to act autonomously. Through loans, strategic alliances, and influence over political appointments, these powers have consistently shaped Pakistan’s domestic and foreign policies.
The notion of external powers manipulating a nation’s policies is not new. Colonial powers such as Britain and France used political and economic control to dominate various regions, often by installing local leaders who would follow their mandates. Pakistan’s journey has been similar, though it has experienced this influence from modern superpowers like the United States and key allies like Saudi Arabia.
Since Pakistan’s independence, the United States has viewed it as a strategic ally, especially during the Cold War and in the subsequent War on Terror. However, this alliance has come with a price. American support for Pakistan’s military regimes and various governments has meant that Washington’s interests have often dictated Pakistan’s policy decisions. A pivotal moment was the aftermath of 9/11, when the then-U.S. President George W. Bush famously declared, “You’re either with us, or you’re against us,” pressuring Pakistan to join America’s war in Afghanistan. Pakistani generals allowed the U.S. military to use airbases within Pakistan, facilitating attacks on Afghanistan. This decision had lasting consequences, as the influx of arms and the destabilising effects of warfare spilt over into Pakistan, damaging its social fabric and economic system. This was a repetition of history; during the Soviet-Afghan war, Pakistan was similarly coerced into becoming a frontline state, with far-reaching consequences that Pakistan has struggled to recover from.
More recently, former Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan’s removal from office in 2022 raised suspicions of American involvement, especially given Khan’s efforts to strengthen ties with Russia. Khan’s attempt to participate in the Kuala Lumpur Summit in 2019 alongside the Malaysian and Turkish presidents was also thwarted by Pakistan’s military under pressure from Saudi Arabia, further underscoring the extent of foreign influence on Pakistan’s policies.
Saudi Arabia has been another major player in Pakistan’s political sphere. Given Pakistan’s economic struggles, Saudi financial aid and oil subsidies have often been lifelines for the country. However, these benefits come with strings attached. Riyadh expects loyalty in return, influencing Pakistan’s foreign policy decisions. For instance, Saudi Arabia reportedly pressured Pakistan to discourage Imran Khan from attending the Kuala Lumpur Summit, which Riyadh saw as a challenge to its leadership in the Muslim world.
This control goes beyond financial leverage. Saudi-funded religious schools in Pakistan promote ideologies aligning with Riyadh’s interests, embedding Saudi influence within Pakistan’s cultural and religious institutions. Additionally, Saudi Arabia’s influence has repeatedly led Pakistani leaders to travel to Riyadh, seeking approval or support, such as Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s recent visit to Saudi Arabia.
Nawaz Sharif’s recent visit to Washington and Shehbaz Sharif’s visit to Riyadh highlight the ongoing nature of this dependency. These visits underscore how Pakistan’s political leaders often seek approval or guidance from foreign capitals before making critical decisions. The reliance on Washington and Riyadh for financial aid and political backing reveals a power dynamic where Pakistan’s leaders are often bound to follow the agendas set by these capitals.
Economic dependency has cemented the influence of Washington and Riyadh over Pakistan. The United States and Saudi Arabia have provided Pakistan with significant financial aid and loans over the years, creating a cycle of dependency. The IMF, which the U.S. heavily influences, also plays a role as Pakistan’s economic stability is often tied to IMF loans. This dependency extends to military appointments; former ISI chief General Hameed Gul once remarked that no army chief could be appointed without approval from Washington and Riyadh, reflecting how deeply foreign influence permeates Pakistan’s power structures.
Pakistan’s struggle for sovereignty remains compromised by the grip of Washington and Riyadh. Events from the 9/11 aftermath to the recent visits of Pakistan’s leaders to these capitals underscore the enduring nature of this control. Pakistan’s policies, military appointments, and even foreign relations are frequently shaped by the interests of these foreign powers. As long as Pakistan remains economically and politically reliant on external aid and approval, it will continue to be bound by the influence of these two capitals, unable to move forward independently or secure its place on the world stage.
The notion of external powers manipulating a nation’s policies is not new. Colonial powers such as Britain and France used political and economic control to dominate various regions, often by installing local leaders who would follow their mandates. Pakistan’s journey has been similar, though it has experienced this influence from modern superpowers like the United States and key allies like Saudi Arabia.
Since Pakistan’s independence, the United States has viewed it as a strategic ally, especially during the Cold War and in the subsequent War on Terror. However, this alliance has come with a price. American support for Pakistan’s military regimes and various governments has meant that Washington’s interests have often dictated Pakistan’s policy decisions. A pivotal moment was the aftermath of 9/11, when the then-U.S. President George W. Bush famously declared, “You’re either with us, or you’re against us,” pressuring Pakistan to join America’s war in Afghanistan. Pakistani generals allowed the U.S. military to use airbases within Pakistan, facilitating attacks on Afghanistan. This decision had lasting consequences, as the influx of arms and the destabilising effects of warfare spilt over into Pakistan, damaging its social fabric and economic system. This was a repetition of history; during the Soviet-Afghan war, Pakistan was similarly coerced into becoming a frontline state, with far-reaching consequences that Pakistan has struggled to recover from.
More recently, former Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan’s removal from office in 2022 raised suspicions of American involvement, especially given Khan’s efforts to strengthen ties with Russia. Khan’s attempt to participate in the Kuala Lumpur Summit in 2019 alongside the Malaysian and Turkish presidents was also thwarted by Pakistan’s military under pressure from Saudi Arabia, further underscoring the extent of foreign influence on Pakistan’s policies.
Saudi Arabia has been another major player in Pakistan’s political sphere. Given Pakistan’s economic struggles, Saudi financial aid and oil subsidies have often been lifelines for the country. However, these benefits come with strings attached. Riyadh expects loyalty in return, influencing Pakistan’s foreign policy decisions. For instance, Saudi Arabia reportedly pressured Pakistan to discourage Imran Khan from attending the Kuala Lumpur Summit, which Riyadh saw as a challenge to its leadership in the Muslim world.
This control goes beyond financial leverage. Saudi-funded religious schools in Pakistan promote ideologies aligning with Riyadh’s interests, embedding Saudi influence within Pakistan’s cultural and religious institutions. Additionally, Saudi Arabia’s influence has repeatedly led Pakistani leaders to travel to Riyadh, seeking approval or support, such as Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s recent visit to Saudi Arabia.
Nawaz Sharif’s recent visit to Washington and Shehbaz Sharif’s visit to Riyadh highlight the ongoing nature of this dependency. These visits underscore how Pakistan’s political leaders often seek approval or guidance from foreign capitals before making critical decisions. The reliance on Washington and Riyadh for financial aid and political backing reveals a power dynamic where Pakistan’s leaders are often bound to follow the agendas set by these capitals.
Economic dependency has cemented the influence of Washington and Riyadh over Pakistan. The United States and Saudi Arabia have provided Pakistan with significant financial aid and loans over the years, creating a cycle of dependency. The IMF, which the U.S. heavily influences, also plays a role as Pakistan’s economic stability is often tied to IMF loans. This dependency extends to military appointments; former ISI chief General Hameed Gul once remarked that no army chief could be appointed without approval from Washington and Riyadh, reflecting how deeply foreign influence permeates Pakistan’s power structures.
Pakistan’s struggle for sovereignty remains compromised by the grip of Washington and Riyadh. Events from the 9/11 aftermath to the recent visits of Pakistan’s leaders to these capitals underscore the enduring nature of this control. Pakistan’s policies, military appointments, and even foreign relations are frequently shaped by the interests of these foreign powers. As long as Pakistan remains economically and politically reliant on external aid and approval, it will continue to be bound by the influence of these two capitals, unable to move forward independently or secure its place on the world stage.
Developereo
Elite Member
Without proper leadership, 'strategic ally' becomes a euphemism for 'useful idiot'.
WatchtowerWarrior4Ever
Registered Member
No they also visited Beijing frequently. That 15 second handshake between COAS and Chinese PM during SCO summit became really famous you know.
Taimoor
Elite Member
The umbilical cord through which these nasty foreign influences are imposed on Pakistan, that cord is connected to GHQ. Forget about Shareef and Zardari clan, they are just pawns of generals. Pakistan needs a complete reset, where these 22 graders unaccountable demi gods in GHQ are put to firing squad, their wings are clipped once a for all, and their focus is FORCELLY put to their bloody job, which is to tackle the enemy nations. All foreign policy decision must be made through consensus and representation of the nation, not just few rats deciding on behalf of 220 million and keep on making blunders after blunders without any consequences for them.
- Status
Users who are viewing this thread
Pakistan Defence Latest
Country Watch Latest
-
Iran - Israel/US War: Israel-US declare war on Iran, Iran responds (363 Viewers)
- Latest: lightning f57
-
Algeria’s J-10C and KJ-500 Deal Signals China’s Biggest Air Power Breakthrough in Africa (14 Viewers)- Latest: BonPlan
-
-
-
Latest Posts
-
Iran - Israel/US War: Israel-US declare war on Iran, Iran responds (363 Viewers)
- Latest: lightning f57
-
Saudi Supreme Court announces Tuesday as beginning of new Islamic year (16 Viewers)
- Latest: Ali_Baba
-
-
-
Algeria’s J-10C and KJ-500 Deal Signals China’s Biggest Air Power Breakthrough in Africa (14 Viewers)
- Latest: BonPlan