Raju Korti
Amid the latest sabre-rattling
between India and Pakistan, a post by Pakistani-origin author Harris Sultan
caught my attention. In a few sharp sentences, he laid bare an uncomfortable
truth: "The Pakistani military has lost every single war -- I think
they’re prepared to lose another one." This blunt assessment is going
viral, striking a nerve not just within Pakistan, but across the region.
Sultan's frustration is understandable. After yet another Pakistani minister, Hanif Abbasi, boasted about the country’s nuclear arsenal being "only for India," Sultan countered with cold logic. He argued that even if India were to take “Pakistan-administered Kashmir”, it wouldn’t automatically lead to nuclear Armageddon. Self-preservation, not suicidal glory, remains the top priority of military leaderships worldwide -- and Pakistan’s generals are no different. Drawing a parallel with Russia’s Vladimir Putin, Sultan emphasized that dictators cling to survival, even at the cost of their rhetoric.
But this moment -- where rage against the military is visibly bubbling over -- raises a crucial question: Can Pakistan truly rise against its own army? The idea sounds romantic but remains a tough ask in the current climate. The Pakistani military is deeply entrenched, not just in defense but in business, media, and politics. Over decades, it has crafted a powerful narrative positioning itself as the sole guardian of Pakistan’s sovereignty and ideology. Challenging such an institution requires not just public anger, but sustained, organized political action -- something Pakistan’s fragile civilian leadership has historically lacked.
![]() |
Harris Sultan: An X grab |
This is where Pakistan’s true opportunity lies: not in the fantasy of a dramatic overthrow, but in building political institutions strong enough to outgrow the army’s shadow. A confident civilian leadership, rooted in genuine democratic legitimacy, can shift the balance over time. Civilian supremacy will not come from street protests alone; it must be built brick by brick through reforms, alliances, and above all, by delivering on the people's needs better than the generals ever could.
Even if Pakistan were to achieve an elected government free from military manipulation, another question lingers: would it finally move past its obsession with Kashmir and hostility toward India?
Realistically, the Kashmir issue runs deep in Pakistan’s national psyche, woven into its very identity since 1947. However, a government unshackled from the army's hyper-nationalist agenda could recalibrate the narrative. Without the military’s vested interest in maintaining a permanent state of tension, there is room for a quieter, more pragmatic approach -- one that focuses on economic recovery, international partnerships, and social stability rather than chest-thumping over Kashmir. Reducing the war rhetoric would not just benefit Pakistan’s standing in the world; it would also directly serve its own people's yearning for peace and prosperity.
Sultan’s post reminds us of a simple truth: real change rarely begins with armies or politicians; it begins with people refusing to accept the status quo. Pakistan’s path to reclaiming its destiny will be long and painful -- but the first step, as always, is daring to imagine that a different future is possible.
No comments:
Post a Comment