top of page

By:

Correspondent

21 August 2024 at 10:20:16 am

Shattered Narrative

The recent claims made by Noreen Niazi, sister of former Prime Minister Imran Khan, completely expose Pakistan’s military myth-making and underline the widening gap between India’s capabilities and Islamabad’s illusions. In a widely circulated interview, Niazi challenged the official Pakistani account of the confrontation that followed the Pahalgam terror attack, claiming that the country’s military leadership concealed the true extent of India’s military advantage during Operation Sindoor...

Shattered Narrative

The recent claims made by Noreen Niazi, sister of former Prime Minister Imran Khan, completely expose Pakistan’s military myth-making and underline the widening gap between India’s capabilities and Islamabad’s illusions. In a widely circulated interview, Niazi challenged the official Pakistani account of the confrontation that followed the Pahalgam terror attack, claiming that the country’s military leadership concealed the true extent of India’s military advantage during Operation Sindoor last year. Her most striking assertion, that Prime Minister Narendra Modi “could have fixed Pakistan” had India chosen a more aggressive course, has predictably triggered fury in Pakistan because it strikes at the very foundation of the establishment’s self-image. Pakistan’s military establishment has always survived not merely through coercive power but the manufacture of perception. Its most enduring weapon been the narrative that Pakistan possesses an equal strategic footing with India despite the overwhelming differences in economic scale, technological capacity and military depth. That carefully constructed illusion has suffered a remarkable blow from a family member of Pakistan’s own most prominent political prisoner. Niazi’s remarks shatter the reputation of Pakistan’s most powerful institution — the army headquarters in Rawalpindi — and its current chief Asim Munir, considered the mastermind of the Pahalgam massacre. Pakistan’s generals have always presented themselves as the ultimate guardians of national security, using confrontation with India as both a strategic doctrine and a domestic political instrument. Niazi’s statements have thoroughly exposed this hollow claim. The statements also expose United States President Donald Trump’s repeated assertion that his intervention apparently helped bring an end to the confrontation, which saw the Indian armed forces striking deep into terror bases within Pakistan. The episode should also force a rethink within India. For months, sections of the domestic political ecosystem questioned the government’s handling of security matters, sometimes treating every military assertion through the prism of partisan suspicion. While a democracy must permit scrutiny, mindless scepticism cannot become reflexive cynicism, particularly when national security decisions are involved. The credibility of India’s armed forces cannot be reduced to domestic political contests. Nor can strategic assessments be shaped by ideological preferences. Countries are judged not by the volume of their arguments but by the strength of their institutions. The Pahalgam attack was intended to project vulnerability in India and undermine the confidence of a rising power. Instead, it produced the opposite effect. With Operation Sindoor, India demonstrated that it would make Pakistan’s terror affiliates pay dearly while retaining the diplomatic and military maturity to control escalation. The significance of this episode lies in the fact that the age in which Pakistan could use terror, brinkmanship and propaganda to maintain an artificial balance is drawing to a close. For decades, Islamabad relied on a combination of terror, international intervention and the assumption that India would exercise restraint regardless of provocation. That calculation has become hopelessly outdated.

Clever seat selection helped BJP to secure historic win

The party won 65 seats against Congress, 37 against NCP (SP) and 29 against Shiv Sena (UBT)

Clever seat selection

Mumbai: The BJP’s strategic seat sharing with the allies has proved beneficial for the party. An analysis of the Assembly election results show that the BJP has scored over its main rival, the Congress, in a big way because of the direct fights.


The analysis shows that BJP defeated all three constituents of the Maharashtra Vikas Aghadi (MVA) – Congress, Shiv Sena (UBT) and NCP (SP) – in the direct fights. This is attributed as one of the reasons for the BJP’s historic poll success.


The BJP contested 147 out of 288 seats. In 76 constituencies, it faced Congress. BJP secured victory in 65 seats and lost only 11 seats, making it a whopping 86 per cent of the total direct fights. This was followed by an even stronger performance against NCP (SP). Of the total 39 fights with Sharad Pawar’s party, BJP captured 37 seats making it 95 per cent of the total fights with NCP (SP). BJP and Shiv Sena (UBT) were head-to-head in 32 constituencies, of which BJP emerged victorious in 29 seats, making this 91 per cent of the total direct contests.


According to a BJP strategist the party had bargained hard with its allies, Shiv Sena and NCP to get the desired constituencies in the seat sharing formula. “We had studied to potential candidates of the MVA. That helped us in choosing the seats where we can register comfortable victories,” the strategist said.


BJP spokesperson Niranjan Shetty attributed the success to all the party workers who worked hard to boost development, infrastructure in the state. He gave credit to Deputy Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis for his contribution to the party’s success.


Shetty pointed out that in 2019, Uddhav Thackeray had stalled all the “novel” and “legendary” projects that Fadnavis had started when he had taken over as CM, making it very easy for the people of Maharashtra to strike a comparison between both the leaders and the potential they had for serving the people. “Devendra Fadnavis gave up his post very easily for the larger good. There are many such examples like Venkaiah Naidu who was BJP National President and later worked as the Vice President of India because that was the need of the hour. We seldom care about our posts,” Shetty told The Perfect Voice.


Congress spokesperson Atul Londhe refused to call the election results as the people’s mandate. “This is not at all a Janata mandate. Despite Maharashtra struggling with so many basic social issues, how can BJP acquire such a huge mandate is the question. If a student copies and fails with just passing marks, it can go unnoticed, but if a student copies and bags the number one position, something is fishy. Why is the BJP scared of ballot papers?” he said.

Comments

bottom of page