PTI freedom movement against Judiciary and Establishment: News, Discussion & Updates

[Lulldapull]

Bhai if munira is a Muslim toady then what are king PlayStation of Jordan or Al-Sissi of Egypt or king Turdogan or MBS or MBZ?

Same same no?

 

[Awwad]

Bhai if munira is a Muslim toady then what are king PlayStation of Jordan or Al-Sissi of Egypt or king Turdogan or MBS or MBZ?

Same same no?

Not at all. You can only compare Sissi to some extent as he was a military chief.

MBS and other kings of GCC are all kingdoms. Why Pakistan to be compared with kingdoms. There's no kingship in Pakistan, it was created at first place as a democracy system. Secondly, the natives of GCC either Emiratis, Qataris, Kuwaitis the state takecare of their population, their every need is fullfilled by state, they have top healthcare, and every other facility (I am talking about natives, not indian or pakistanis who come here to work) . Compare them with Pakistanis. Compare their average household income with that of average Pakistani. So Kingdoms of GCC are atleast far far better for their own populations. Even if they are not very vocal for rest of muslim world. The thread starter is not talking about Assim munir to be a sipa-salar for ummah. Nobody expects anything from him. We are only expecting him to behave with its own population who pays for his salary & perks.

Lastly, if we ever have to compare Pakistani system then compare it with India that is created at same time and same geo-location. In india if their COAS do even 1% of things what assim has done, then indian nation & Modi will hung upside down that General. That is how powerful democracy is in india. We need to learn from our own environment instead of countries from totally different geolocations / different circumstances .

 

[Cash gk]

This is why they there and this is the mission ASIM munier working day night

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Cash gk]

This is the mission they both working day night for their Masters

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[313Ghazi]

The rise of these "strong men" is like the diffusion of a fart in the air. It will spread and revolt whoever smells it but ultimately they'll fade into obscurity, thier stench being the only short lasting memory and the abuse they got for the short while they created the stink.

 

[Taimoor]

The rise of these "strong men" is like the diffusion of a fart in the air. It will spread and revolt whoever smells it but ultimately they'll fade into obscurity, thier stench being the only short lasting memory and the abuse they got for the short while they created the stink.

These so called strong men are nothing but bunch of highly compromised individuals whoes personal and family interests are tied to the forigen powers. It's a simple equation.

 

[Oscar]

Gift of Cash GPT bot keeps on giving

 

[Oscar]

The group of Pakistani army corps commanders of which the COAS is one resembles more the Myanmar military junta. Obviously there have little bit more brain cells and care more about their countrymen than their Burmese counterparts.

They are compromised in different ways -
Usually picked up by recruiters when they are captains or majors - not always the ones on deputation or foreign courses as alleged by the ignorant here but almost always the mediocre variety.

The other time when they are recruited is during the Major to Colonel transition time - this is your 40s - when you’re making ok but you need a leap and you’re not seeing that jump - have kids or need to outdo your peers - excellent time to get in on that mix of mid life crisis and responsibilities.

You then take that individual and use the existing compromised network to drag them up the ranks - essentially a perpetual cycle of moles promoting moles helping along with an innate knowledge of what gets your ahead guiding you.

 

[nahtanbob]

They are compromised in different ways -
Usually picked up by recruiters when they are captains or majors - not always the ones on deputation or foreign courses as alleged by the ignorant here but almost always the mediocre variety.

The other time when they are recruited is during the Major to Colonel transition time - this is your 40s - when you’re making ok but you need a leap and you’re not seeing that jump - have kids or need to outdo your peers - excellent time to get in on that mix of mid life crisis and responsibilities.

You then take that individual and use the existing compromised network to drag them up the ranks - essentially a perpetual cycle of moles promoting moles helping along with an innate knowledge of what gets your ahead guiding you.

you are giving too much credit to the political science rejects in the CIA. It is more like mediocre types in the Pakistani army promoting other mediocre types within any organization.

I can see the CIA derailing someone who is a threat. It is beyond their brains to keep pulling up below average types.

 

[Oscar]

you are giving too much credit to the political science rejects in the CIA. It is more like mediocre types in the Pakistani army promoting other mediocre types within any organization.

I can see the CIA derailing someone who is a threat. It is beyond their brains to keep pulling up below average types.

You will be surprised but it is a factor of the bold as well. Sycophants will pull up sycophants.

 

[nahtanbob]

You will be surprised but it is a factor of the bold as well. Sycophants will pull up sycophants.

The Pakistani army has no monopoly on that

 

[EugeneP]

In recent years, figures like Egypt’s General Abdel Fattah el-Sisi and Pakistan’s General Asim Munir have emerged as powerful military leaders, wielding control over their countries with the backing of foreign allies. Both generals were brought into power with significant international support, aimed at securing regional interests for those foreign powers. Their rule, marked by heavy-handed control over democratic processes and suppression of dissent, underscores the strategies employed by foreign nations to maintain influence in regions critical to their geopolitical aims.

Paths to Power and Foreign Influence

In Egypt, General Sisi took power in 2013 through a military coup that ousted the country’s first democratically elected president, Mohamed Morsi. This move had the full backing of Saudi Arabia and the United States, who sought stability in Egypt that aligned with their own interests. Sisi’s administration quickly dismantled Egypt’s democratic structures, suppressing opposition voices and consolidating military dominance over politics. His rise to power served a clear agenda: ensure stability beneficial to foreign allies, primarily by protecting Israel and maintaining control over the strategic Suez Canal.

Similarly, in Pakistan, General Asim Munir’s ascent was reportedly influenced by foreign capitals, notably Washington and Riyadh. After Pakistan’s former Prime Minister Imran Khan advocated for a more independent foreign policy, which included support for the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), the United States grew wary of Pakistan’s alignment with China. Imran Khan’s favouring of CPEC—a project that grants China a crucial trade route—was seen as a threat to American interests in the region. Therefore, by bringing Munir to power, foreign allies aimed to curb Pakistan’s engagement with China and limit CPEC’s impact, while pushing Pakistan closer to Indian hegemony, which aligns with U.S. strategies in South Asia.

Suppression of Democratic Movements

General Sisi’s rule in Egypt has been defined by strict control over political processes and harsh repression of dissent. After ousting Morsi, Sisi clamped down on Egypt’s democratic space, limiting civil liberties, and ensuring that any opposition was either marginalised or silenced. This crackdown, widely criticised, was overlooked by his foreign backers, who prioritised their strategic interests over democratic values.

In Pakistan, a similar story unfolded with General Munir. The former Prime Minister Imran Khan, known for his nationalist and independent stance, was removed through a no-confidence vote under controversial circumstances, allegedly influenced by foreign interests. Following his ouster, Khan’s imprisonment further highlighted the lengths to which the establishment would go to keep him out of power, echoing the treatment of opposition figures in authoritarian regimes. For both Sisi and Munir, democratic processes were seen as a threat to the alignment with foreign agendas, and therefore, they worked to curb these movements effectively.

Strategic Interests Behind Military Control

The installation of leaders like Sisi and Munir is driven by broader geopolitical aims. In Egypt, Western and regional powers prioritise a stable regime that secures the Suez Canal, maintains Egypt within a pro-Western sphere, and protects Israel’s security. Meanwhile, in Pakistan, foreign powers see the necessity of keeping the country aligned with India, which they view as a crucial ally in South Asia. With the U.S. aiming to counter China’s influence, particularly the CPEC corridor, they have sought to discourage Pakistan from fostering closer ties with China.

The American strategy, especially after its experiences in Afghanistan, involves installing compliant leaders who can prevent the rise of independent leadership that could shift alliances. With Munir’s rise, there has been a visible shift in Pakistan’s stance on CPEC and its foreign policy, marking a return to Washington’s influence over Pakistan’s strategic decisions.

Authoritarian Leaders with Conditional Support

Both Sisi and Munir govern with strong foreign backing, but their popularity among their own people is questionable. History has repeatedly shown that leaders who serve foreign interests rather than their own citizens often lose favour with their people. Egypt’s former president, Hosni Mubarak, ruled for decades with Western support but was eventually overthrown amid widespread public opposition. Similarly, Pakistan’s past military rulers, such as Ayub Khan, Yahya Khan, Zia-ul-Haq, and Musharraf, all met disgraced ends after falling out of favour, with either forced resignations or public disdain.

Foreign Policy Gambits and Regional Stability

The recent extension of General Munir’s term and his backing from allies in the U.S. and Saudi Arabia illustrate their desire to maintain a compliant leader in Pakistan. This approach is similar to the foreign policy strategy seen in Egypt, where Sisi’s continued rule aligns with foreign interests that favour stability over democracy. However, this stability often comes at the cost of democratic freedoms and public support. In both countries, foreign powers prioritise their strategic interests, ignoring the voices of the local populace.
Country like Pakistan and Egypt too big to Attack militarily .

Countries like Pakistan and Egypt, while difficult for foreign powers to control through direct military action, are often subdued through economic manipulation and the installation of puppet dictators. When powerful nations cannot seize control overtly, they resort to tactics such as destabilizing economies, placing corrupt individuals in power, and binding nations in dependency through debt and economic leverage. This centuries-old strategy, perfected by the West, has proven highly effective in maintaining influence over vulnerable nations. By fostering economic dependence on Western loans and Saudi and uae support, foreign powers secure control, quietly exploiting resources and installing loyal leaders who serve their interests over the well-being of their own people.

Lessons from History

While leaders like Sisi and Munir appear strong today, history reminds us that foreign-backed authoritarian regimes often meet bitter ends. Egypt’s Mubarak ruled with a firm grip for years but faced disgraceful removal when public sentiment turned. In Pakistan, previous military rulers who rose with strong foreign backing eventually faced similar downfalls. Power based on foreign support alone is rarely sustainable, and ultimately, leaders lacking genuine public backing become vulnerable to changing political tides.
Both Sisi and Munir serve as contemporary examples of foreign-aligned strongmen. But as history has shown, all autocrats eventually face the consequences of ignoring their people’s aspirations. The fates of past dictators demonstrate that true power lies not in foreign alliances but in public trust, and as soon as that trust erodes, even the strongest leaders become powerless.

There seems to be no factual evidence for the assertion "backing of foreign allies". As for as I can remember, not once in last four years has anyone of any importance in Biden administration has even mentioned the name El-Sisi or Munir. U.S. is a pretty open place (and quite a leaky one too). If there was any interest in the goings on in Egyptian or Pakistani political drama that interested anyone in administration, some news would have been there. I have my Occam's razor analysis: Both Egypt and Pakistan do not have a democratic tradition and hence a strong man/military general format is the most stable form of government. Overanalyzing a natural cultural trait of a nation by overloading with mysterious forces is fun pastime but useless exercise.

 

[Cash gk]

New secretary of State going to be a big trouble for ASIM munier

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

Allow me to be a Devil's advocate here. The Pak Deep State is a different beast. When he becomes a liability these "strongmen" get dusted in no time at all: Ayub, Yahya, Zia, Musharraf etc....

 

[SaadH]

There seems to be no factual evidence for the assertion "backing of foreign allies". As for as I can remember, not once in last four years has anyone of any importance in Biden administration has even mentioned the name El-Sisi or Munir. U.S. is a pretty open place (and quite a leaky one too). If there was any interest in the goings on in Egyptian or Pakistani political drama that interested anyone in administration, some news would have been there. I have my Occam's razor analysis: Both Egypt and Pakistan do not have a democratic tradition and hence a strong man/military general format is the most stable form of government. Overanalyzing a natural cultural trait of a nation by overloading with mysterious forces is fun pastime but useless exercise.

US in "not backing Sisi" never went as far as changing the meaning of words in use in English language for centuries...e.g. the word coup is no longer meant to reflect an overthrowing of a democratically elected gov't. That was an outdated and obsolete understanding of the word, per Barak Obomba...