* Says president plans to delay elections
Pakistan requires a unified military to ensure cohesion because the Pakistani military has been the guarantor of the state from the beginning and thus the arbiter of Pakistani politics, according to a commentary released by Stratfor. The US-based news intelligence service said President General Pervez MusharrafÂ’s coup in 1999 made clear PakistanÂ’s underlying reality, namely that it is a deeply divided entity, which it is not quite reasonable to call a nation, presided over by a state. Whatever the formal character of the state, be it democratic, military, Islamist or otherwise, the greatest threat to PakistanÂ’s territorial integrity comes from the divisions among the countryÂ’s various ethnic groups, Stratfor maintained. Whatever demonstrations there are, whatever politicians may say, whether elections are held or not - so long as military cohesion holds, the military will be the glue of society.
| Don't confuse the Pak military with an actual armed force. It's a uniformed oligarchy, much better at providing economic security for officers (retired or otherwise) than it is at winning wars. It's incompetent when engaged by a real army, such as India's or... ummm... India's. It's adequate for oppressing the country's urban population, but totally inept when faced by minimally competent but well-armed tribesmen. Pakistain is actually four or more ministates: Punjab, Sindh, Balochistan, and Pashtunistan. None of the ministates have much affection or use for any of the others. I believe the technical term we're looking for here is "dog's breakfast." |