A soldier tells his tale

E-Paper | June 13, 2026

ISLAMABAD: Former Punjab governor Ghulam Mustafa Khar on Saturday said he had advised former prime minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto to appoint Lieutenant General Abdul Majeed Malik as the Chief of Army Staff (COAS). However, after developing differences with Khar, Bhutto changed his mind and selected General Ziaul Haq.

“Had Bhutto appointed Abdul Majeed Malik, he would not have been hanged,” said Mr Khar.

Speaking at the launch of the book ‘Hum Bhi Wahan Mojad Thay - Dastan-e-Hayat’ (We were there too - story of a life) the autobiography of 96-year-old retired Lt-Gen Abdul Majeed Malik, Mr Khar said prime minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto consulted him for the appointment of the COAS.

“I suggested Abdul Majeed’s name, which Bhutto approved. Bhutto even had a meeting with Majeed at my office and congratulated him in advance,” said Mr Khar.

The former governor said, meanwhile, he developed some differences with Bhutto and decided to resign from the governorship.

“After my resignation, Bhutto changed his decision and appointed Ziaul Haq, which was a big mistake,” Mr Khar said.

He added that just like Bhutto, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif also made a big mistake when he appointed Pervez Musharraf as COAS.

Mr Khar said that instead of Musharraf, Lt-Gen Ali Kuli Khan should have been given the top position.

Speaking on the occasion, Adviser to the Prime Minister on Foreign Affairs and National Security Sartaj Aziz said the writer mentioned in his book that dictators at the time of launching a coup never have long-term plans of staying in power.

“They come out of their barracks for a short time. But later, men close to them paint a wrong picture and make the dictators believe that the country needs them and they should continue,” said Mr Aziz, quoting an excerpt from the book.

He termed the book an important document, which covers many important incidents such as Kargil incursion and appointment of army chiefs. Speaking on the occasion, Federal Minister retired Lt-Gen Abdul Qadir Baloch said he also followed Gen Majeed.

“Following retirement both of us joined politics,” he said, adding that Gen Majeed’s services in army and politics were laudable.

Former senator S.M. Zafar said the writer based his life on principles. While writing this book, he mentioned everything he had observed in his long military and political career.

Former federal minister Syeda Abida Hussain, former governor Punjab retired Gen Sawar Khan, newly-elected PML-N senator Abdul Qayyum and former foreign minister Gohar Ayub Khan also appreciated the illustrious author for sharing incidents from his career.

The author of the book, retired Lt-Gen and five-time MNA from Chakwal also served as a federal minister and ambassador. He said to highlight several important military and political developments, he had written this book.

“This is a simple book, a solider’s story written by a soldier,” he said.

Published in Dawn March 7th, 2015

On a mobile phone? Get the Dawn Mobile App: Apple Store | Google Play

Our readers are at the heart of everything we do.
Do you have a thought to share or a way we can improve? We’d love to hear it. Reach out to us at feedback@dawn.com.

Newspaper

Budget 2026-27: HEC’s recurring grant kept unchanged despite demand for significant increase

Rawal Dam sewage treatment plant receives nominal allocation, again

Protesting govt employees in Islamabad term 7pc pay increase a pittance

WASEEMOSCOW

Mar 07, 2015 11:13am

Raheel Sharif very good for Pakistan and may be another mistake of sharif .

Recommend 0

Digi

Mar 07, 2015 11:13am

Very poorly penned piece. The book and the author are mentioned way too late, whereas Mr. Khar and his statement takes the limelight from the start. As an objective reader, I initially thought that it is Mr. Khar whom the writer of this piece is calling a "soldier" and who has written a book.

Recommend 0

Mustafa

Mar 07, 2015 11:39am

@WASEEMOSCOW; General Raheel is indeed very good for Pakistan, however I am not sure Nawaz was really given a choice about it, general sahib was probably chosen by the core commanders and was a fait accompli for Nawaz.

Recommend 0

M. Emad

Mar 07, 2015 11:45am

Had premiership given to Sheikh Mujib in 1971, Bhutto would not have been hanged.

Recommend 0

Zak

Mar 07, 2015 12:19pm

....history shows, Pakistan progressed tremendously on all fronts under Ayub Khan and Pervaiz Musharaf in all respects. Not because they were army men, but because they were sincere and honest to the country. Country has done worst in all respects under PPP and PML-N. Look at senate seat selection, horse trading on people's money. Need I say more!

Recommend 0

Sayyar Khan

Mar 07, 2015 12:31pm

@Zak Ayub I agree did good for the country. Mushraf and Zia destroyed Pakisan.

Recommend 0

Human

Mar 07, 2015 12:52pm

@Sayyar Khan Musharraf did not destroy Pakistan.......

Recommend 0

IBN E ASHFAQUE

Mar 07, 2015 12:58pm

@Zak Agree 100%

Recommend 0

Mushtaq Rana

Mar 07, 2015 01:12pm

Anyone writing about Bhutto's hanging is not sincere if he or she ignores the fact that Bhutto was tried for ordering the murder of his critic, Ahmad Raza Kasuri whose father, Nawab Mohammad Ahmad Kasuri was killed instead by mistake during the attempt. It was not Zia ul Haq who had ordered Bhutto's death sentence but the judges.

Recommend 0

ashok kumar lal

Mar 07, 2015 01:45pm

@Zak Ayub was good for Pakistan and India, till he was persuaded to go for 1965 war.ZAB was main persuader.Ayub was told his army cam take Delhi in three days.He had informed USA before taking their approval that his army will come back from Delhi but retain Kashmir.Shastry and Gen.Harbaksh Singh foiled his plan and he died a sad man regretting his decision.Pakistan lost the track at that point.

Recommend 0

Haridas

Mar 07, 2015 01:46pm

@Zak You are correct in terms of political corruption. Even then there is no alternative to democracy. Democracy in its adolscence bound to experience all these and these will vanish as it matures while national institutions strengthens itself. The democracy stands on some very strong pillars: executive & its opposition, burocracy, judiciary, NGOs and media. People elect only executive & its opposition, while others are institutions and they strengthen day by day albeit the fact that it takes years to get to the maturity.

Recommend 0

Tahir A

Mar 07, 2015 02:04pm

Sadly Bhutto did an ungodly act by taking nature's laws in his own hand by declaring Ahmadi's as non-Muslims. This was totally unnecessary. One does not mess around with other people's beliefs. I firmly believe Bhutto would not have been dead the way he did.

Recommend 0

Mama Majeed

Mar 07, 2015 02:15pm

A very good book-good story written by a soldier - told by a soldier but NOT like a soldier but as a a great chamcha & politician of the corrupt leaders!!!!!!

Recommend 0

Riaz

Mar 07, 2015 02:31pm

Destiny !!!!!

Recommend 0

Kamal Pasha.

Mar 07, 2015 02:38pm

@ashok kumar lal, Ayub was compelled to go to it was Indian Air Force who attacked the passenger Tain and killed many including a college girl student. Which was unacceptable to Pakistan.

Recommend 0

Saf

Mar 07, 2015 02:49pm

Think the writer does not seem to understand in the military the guy at the top has to take all his officers with him there have been many occasions around the world where junior officers have over thrown the senior military generals. I was was not around the Zia era but Musharraf came in because the government was corrupt, incompetent and had brought the country on verge of bankruptcy and it looks like he doing the same again.

Recommend 0

Munir Varraich

Mar 07, 2015 02:51pm

@Digi You are correct. I also thought its about Mr.Khar's book

Recommend 0

Munir Varraich

Mar 07, 2015 02:59pm

There are no IFs and BUTs when it comes to history.It is the same with Bhutto's end. There were a collection of "causes" which collectively pointed to his un-natural death. It all started when he parted ways with Ayub Khan, rightly or wrongly. Mr.Khar knows about that.

Recommend 0

Pashtunyar

Mar 07, 2015 04:05pm

Our politicians havent realized that the army works as an insitution and that they will always protect their core interests no matter who chief is!

Recommend 0

Desi

Mar 07, 2015 04:20pm

@Zak CRAP, army men are trained to march, do not know the intricacies of art of political agreement. See china, arab rulers, they all draw line and march. Mullah ki daud masjid tak. All these temp arrangements are short term. Think long, look at India with sanatan dharm, it ,looks real long term.

Recommend 0

Muhammed Ali

Mar 07, 2015 04:34pm

These people never learn from their mistakes....they think that they are above the law.

Recommend 0

Pak-Patriot

Mar 07, 2015 04:39pm

People hardly have any time to read books. It is only a personal record of events as a person conceives in his own mind. Bhutto was a much more intelligent and practical politician than all the names mentioned here. What he saw in Zia was not much out of the way. Zia was a "Murd-e-Momin" and his end proves it beyond any doubt. Personally, I am not a fan of Zia for his dictatorial rule but have great regard for his humble nature and love for Islam. His toppling of Bhutto has many untold stories that are still getting out. But one thing is very clear. He came at the time when Bhutto was about to remove him for defying his orders on an action in a political matter of concern. He was cautioned by a top bureaucrat that prompted him to topple Bhutto. Rest is another decade of events in need of a very comprehensive and honest depiction of facts in a voluminous book to be written by somebody who knows.

Recommend 0

BACTERIA

Mar 07, 2015 04:39pm

@Human Pakistan experienced only two golden periods in its history . One under the governance of Mr. Ayub and 2nd under the so-called dictatorship of Mr. Musharraf. The Government of Mr. Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto was also a symbol of good government to some extent otherwise, we have always seen chaos in Pakistan since 1947.

Recommend 0

Feroz

Mar 07, 2015 04:59pm

I am shocked at all this loose talk about the hanging of an democratically elected PM Bhutto. What it exposes is the banana republic Pakistan became when the Judiciary became an instrument to murder for ideological or monetary reasons, no one knows. Since that day Democracy has come and gone according to the whims and fancies of the Judges of the day, Constitution be damned. No wonder Law and Order is in shambles, with justice available only to the high and mighty or ability to pay basis. Thousands have gone missing without a beat being missed --- pathetic and ridiculous.

Recommend 0

vijai

Mar 07, 2015 05:18pm

@Kamal Pasha. Do you really believe that a country can go to war for the death of a college girl? If it is true, now so many people are getting killed in the crossfire at the border. Why not start another war?

Recommend 0

muhammad shafique

Mar 07, 2015 06:22pm

@Pak-Patriot yes, ghulam ishaq khan prompted zia to topple bhutto after bhutto had struck a deal with the opposition and asked GIK to bring him the general's dossier the next day. Zia was a humble man in the worst sense of the term, like a Uriah Heep.

Recommend 0

muhammad shafique

Mar 07, 2015 06:24pm

@Feroz you just hit the nail on the head !

Recommend 0

Nizamuddin Ahmad Aali

Mar 07, 2015 07:20pm

This is too little too late and the book is one sided story. If E. Pakistan Bengali people had gotten their God given right as a Pakistani citizen the Bhutto would have lived for a long time either as president or leader of opposition. In reality we never talk about the mother of all evil, Ayub Khan who had tried every thing to separate East Pakistan from west. ( read the memoirs of Kamal Hussain, foreign minister of Bangladesh and Chief Justice Muneer who were approached by Ayub Khan to offer the separation of E. Pakistan. Also a coward General named Niazi was also a factor.) Ayub Khan and niazi should have tried for treason for aiding the enemy ( India ) and putting the lives of Pakistani soldiers and civilians in harms way. How long we will be hiding the facts from our younger generation and for what.

Recommend 0

Silajit

Mar 07, 2015 07:24pm

@Kamal Pasha. It was Operation Gibraltar that started it all - Ayub thinking that army soldiers would be disguised as locals and rouse the people. Unfortunately many of them were turned in and war effectively broke out and became more widespread in Kashmir. At that point, Shastri decided that he would open up the entire border. At that point it was clear that a strong Pakistan (India Pakistan trade was at an all time high before the war) was not in India's interest and India got a payback opportunity in 1971.

Recommend 0

ABC

Mar 07, 2015 07:24pm

It is very easy for people like Khar, who was not even viewed as a sensible man in the 1970s, to say I did this and I did that. Did he know at that time that Zia-ul Haq will be a disaster for the nation and personally for Bhutto? Whenever someone wants to portray someone as a hero, they write a book. It happens a lot in the west. Very soon, we will also hear a book launch for Sartaj Aziz's biography.

Recommend 0

ABC

Mar 07, 2015 07:28pm

@Pak-Patriot You contradict yourself so much. At one point you say you admire Zia for his love for Islam. But then you also say he came at a time when Bhutto was to oust him for conflict on a political matter. But he was still Islamic, yah? Doe Islam allow the army in Pakistan to be above the law?

Recommend 0

Tahir Hameed

Mar 07, 2015 07:29pm

It is time to stop talking about the past. Let us accept that Pakistan is a horrendous mess and work together to fix it.

Recommend 0

SRK

Mar 07, 2015 07:52pm

@Zak Dumb n delusional! Ayub responsible for 1965 defeat and Musharraf for Kargil defeat. Mate, do you know knowledge of history needs a baseline IQ?

Recommend 0

Pragmatist

Mar 07, 2015 08:33pm

Bhutto would have been hanged regardless. He was his own worst enemy. He betrayed the liberal Pakistanis that voted for him in the hope of liberalization of the society and curtailment of mullah-ism. Instead he nourished the religious element and conspired with JI and its student wing to defeat all progressive student movements. He is the one that banned alcohol in this country. Zia just enhanced and intensified what was already started by Bhutto.

Recommend 0

Chao

Mar 07, 2015 09:03pm

Mr. Bush the senior was Director of CIA when Gen Zia was appointed as the coas. The story goes that Mr. Bush held a meeting of CIA in 1975, and under a US strategic decision for a final all out push for complete disintegration of Soviet Union, decided to prime Pakistan for this purpose. Gen Zia was already a chosen person for this job on his earlier record of completely routing the Palestinian refugees in Jordan. So Mr. Bhutto couldn't have appointed anyone other than Gen Zia even if he wanted to. The rest of the story is all a part of facts of history.

Recommend 0

Mar 07, 2015 09:13pm

The saying " Past is another country" fails miserably in case of Pakistan, except the beginning rest of the history has repetitive eye opening failures, never learning any lesson. This article is sensible since it focuses on the "Pehley apne gireban mein jhanko" slogan, doesn't blame rest of the world! Military training and tactics generally don't work in politics (and business) but since military wants to get involved, therefore civil-military think-tanks are one solution (as in US, Europe etc.)! There is no lack of talent it just has to channeled via such public institutions (yes corruption has to be fixed as well)!

Recommend 0

sri1

Mar 07, 2015 09:29pm

@Mustafa "I am not sure Nawaz was really given a choice about it, general sahib was probably chosen by the core commanders" Nawaz Sharif had many senior options to choose from that high command would have gone with, but this time around the PM was very smart in choosing a can-d0 general who had in experience core strategy initiatives on counter-insurgency and anti-terrorism to his credit and also a staunchly anti-TTP, anti-strategic-depth general. Raheel Sharif also appears similar in mold to pro-democracy Gen Jehangir Karamat who Nawaz in his first stint made the cardinal mistake of ousting to be replaced by Mushy. The bonus for Nawaz is that Gen Raheel would not interfere in politics and at the same time make systemic changes needed to go forward in the war against terrorism that Mushy and Kayani never had the guts for. All in all, you have to give it to shrewdness on the part of civilian leaders and good survival instinct to learn from hard lessons, not luck or conspiracy theories yet again.

Recommend 0

khanm

Mar 07, 2015 09:31pm

@M. Emad. I agree with you 1000%. Anybody who was unfaithful and dishonest to the country got his fate. Look at our history whether you believe it or not.

Recommend 0

Amin

Mar 07, 2015 09:33pm

Gen Abdul Majeed Malik has had a more or less below average performance as a soldier as well as a politician. He has been unable to contribute positively to the Army or to his constituency in Chakwal.

Recommend 0

Jaygor

Mar 07, 2015 09:35pm

@Haridas democarcy is a but a method to change the executive leadership of the state. In absence of anything better we sort of worship it as sarcosant yet it is but a system to change government. The rights and liberties of all people (minorities included) which aer far far more important than a showcase democracy. Bhutoo met a tragic end becuase he usurped the rights and liberties of the people.

Recommend 0

Rashid Sultan

Mar 07, 2015 09:41pm

Zulfi wouldn't have hanged if (1) He hadn't become a politician and (2) Zia ul Haq had remained in India after partition or (3) Neither had been born (4) One had died at a young age (5) If Zia hadn't joined the army.

Recommend 0

IMRAN ALI

Mar 07, 2015 09:43pm

all 3 P.M.mujeebur Rehman,Indra Gandhi ,ZAB died unnatural... were involved in breaking Pakistan,as a result million of innocent people died

Recommend 0

khanm

Mar 07, 2015 09:43pm

The question is how credible is Khar. So many others like him ruled us who did not deserve at all to be our leaders. It is so unfortunate that they all will be named as our leaders in our history. Pakistani people are being continuously robed of our pride and everything by these unfaithful leaders.

Recommend 0

Its in making

Mar 07, 2015 09:45pm

@vijai Another war is in making. Don't you know???

Recommend 0

IMRAN ALI

Mar 07, 2015 09:56pm

It was during ZAB rule we got involved in Afghanistan,when he started supporting Gulbuddin Hekmatyar .. Under the secret policy of USA, Britain and the patronage of Pakistani General Naseerullah Babar, then governor of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, and with the blessing of President Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, camps were set up to train Hekmatyar and other anti-Daoud Islamists.and spread of mullasim by supporting JI. and his policy of nationalization destroyed everything...

Recommend 0

Meena

Mar 07, 2015 11:58pm

@M.Emad you are absolutely right.

Recommend 0

Shahzad

Mar 08, 2015 12:03am

@Digi Likeiwse, that is exactly how I felt about this piece of article.

Recommend 0

Shahzad

Mar 08, 2015 12:11am

@Mushtaq Rana I do not know how old you are, but let me inform you of the fact that the court's decision was split 50/50, and one judge was absent. We still do not know how that absent judge would have decided. So now you know.

Recommend 0

nsrao

Mar 08, 2015 12:23am

@Mustafa , Well who said ( but for Pakistanis ) Nawaz is the PM of Pakistan & no one who has a head on his shoulders believes ( if he / she knows the history of W.Pakistan ) Nawaz has the ability or the one who chooses a COASS . It never happens that way & this is the same in Perviaz Musharaff 's case . It's USA which decides who's who in W.Pakistan - how many know this ! All corps commanders are on payroll of say , west if not US. Period .

Recommend 0

sja

Mar 08, 2015 01:03am

Mr. Khar and the old who have memories, of what happened and why, there is one thing for sure - the dismemberment of Pakistan at the hands of ZAB was big enough for the end he got - if and buts and all is wrong to say Mr. Khar, however, you acted in those days, but we lost half of Pakistan just because of one man who said vehemently, that he will break the legs of those who will travel to East Pakistan, after the win of ZAB opponent MR so look what was done and could have been, you did not say if you tried to save the UNITY OF PAKISTAN by advising to your close comrade ZAB to go and attend the NA in East Pakistan. Things happen for a reason and such a big act should not be without accountability -- Army was defeated at the behest of ZAB and some one had to do the dirty laundry besides you saving steps.

Recommend 0

Dr.Salim Haidrani

Mar 08, 2015 01:07am

This is really a 'simple book' because in the 1950s, 1960s, 1970s, 1980s and 1990s decisions about the Chief of the Army's appointment were made outside Pakistan and the serious political historians in Pakistan and abroad already had written about it.

Recommend 0

fida sayani USA

Mar 08, 2015 01:25am

@M. Emad Bhutto did not want to share the cake with Mujeeb and ended up on the gallows. His problem was that he was too much a WADERA.

Recommend 0

Mohsin Patel

Mar 08, 2015 02:15am

@Sayyar Khan Why do you think East Pakistan broke up from original Pakistan of 1947? It is Ayub' s 10 year rule that created hatred between the two wings. Who do you think made Sheikh Mujib such a big leader? Ayub Khan. Yes Ayub devoloped West Pakistan ( the present day Pakistan) but in his ten years of rule Bengals were treated with contempt and were made to feel inferior. 1971 separation did not happen because of India attacking Pakistan. The fire was already there . India just took advantage. Countries do not break up in two or three years of internal differences.By the time Thats took over the volcano was ready to erupt. But unfortunately Thats and Bhutto instead of trying to tame the fire helped it grow.

Recommend 0

Omar

Mar 08, 2015 02:17am

@Zak , I agree it progressed and was safe under President Ayub Khan, because I think he had the interest of the country at heart. Under Mushraff, he had his self interest at heart and to stay in power at any cost. Artifical progress was made because of the monies received due to the Afghan war.

Recommend 0

siddiq

Mar 08, 2015 02:30am

zia ul haq and his religious cronies are responsible for the problems in pakistan. but they are not the only ones.

Recommend 0

Khan

Mar 08, 2015 02:36am

@ZAK Musharaf is the cause of all the problems we are facing today electricity, militancy, balochistan unrest etc.

Recommend 0

Riaz M M

Mar 08, 2015 04:01am

Bhutto was not the first one to make a mistake in selecting the wrong person to be chief of Pakistan Army .First of all Liaquat Ali khan made a mistake in selecting Ayub khan and then Ayub blundered in appointing Yahya Khan.Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif did not learn from mistakes of Liaquat and Ayub .

Recommend 0

khan saheb

Mar 08, 2015 05:16am

We missed, Judiciary was not honest an fair in awarding death sentence to Bhutto. A B Haleem who later became the C J SC disagreed and later on one occasion mentioned that never in history on a split court decision anyone is ever hanged, but again it is history and we never learn from it.

Recommend 0

Farhan

Mar 08, 2015 05:16am

@ashok kumar lal : Ashok , you are spot on. Pakistan was on the road to economic success after Bhutto ill advised Ayub Khan to go to war. Ayub was given illusions of triumph after holding war games with the US in 1964. It was a fatal decision and it cost us Pakistani's dearly. The country started going downhill after 1965.

Recommend 0

Taimur Tareen

Mar 08, 2015 06:35am

@Haridas. We have seen how democracies were given chances to strengthen and then what happened in Egypt Libya etc. in Pakistan if this so called democracy (if at all we call it with this name), is given a chance, NS will end up as Khalifs for life! Any doubt yet? A sincere dictatorship is better than corrupt democracy trying to maintain a status quo. Taimur USA

Recommend 0

Ekram

Mar 08, 2015 06:35am

@ashok kumar lal How did Pakistan lose the 1965 war? Please tell us. Did not India attempt to cross the BRB and could not do so? How much territory did India lose in that war? Does IAF remember M. M. Alam? It will always do so as long as there is an IAF.

Recommend 0

Narinder

Mar 08, 2015 06:49am

It is mute point at this stage to bring in Mr. Bhuttoo in this great blame game. Dead don't talk.

Recommend 0

pakistani

Mar 08, 2015 06:50am

All our politicians - past and present alike are a big joke and their idioticity knows no bounds - as is evident from the statement: "Had Bhutto appointed Abdul Majeed Malik, he would not have been hanged,” said Mr Khar. "

Recommend 0

Javed USA

Mar 08, 2015 07:28am

Bhutto dig two grave in one shot one for himself and one for Pakistan. That's called strategic politics.

Recommend 0

Surinder Saini

Mar 08, 2015 08:29am

Excellent comments from both sides of the border, let us not dig up the past. Should work for peace and prosperity for both nations, for current & future generations!

Recommend 0

m h kayani

Mar 08, 2015 12:18pm

@Zak Bhutto was hanged because he was selfish and power hungry, not sincere at all, the progressive rule of Ayub Khan and Zia is commendable others were just like rest pf politicians only interested in getting rich. the most worst lot are PPP and PMLN, they way nation is heading now for sure nothing else but down hill. in 1971 Majeeb should have been the PM Bhutto lost the nation because of his greed and selfishness.

Recommend 0

m h kayani

Mar 08, 2015 12:21pm

I don't give much value to this book, however Bhutto was hanged because he was selfish and power hungry. Bhutto was never a sincere politician. he was show biz politician more of a actor.

Recommend 0

m h kayani

Mar 08, 2015 12:29pm

@Nizamuddin Ahmad Aali This is really a new one.

Recommend 0

Mushtaq Rana

Mar 08, 2015 12:48pm

Shahzad, You're right. The court was split 50-50. But that was not my point. My point was, and still is, that there was a murder. There was someone who had ordered that murder. There were five people who were arrested and tried. Four of these people confessed their crime and revealed that the fifth accused (ZAB) had ordered the murder. All the five were hanged. Anyone writing about this cannot short-circuit history in three words, i.e "Zia hanged Bhtoo."

Recommend 0

Haque Khan

Mar 08, 2015 12:52pm

Bhutto's biggest mistake was that he under pressure from the islamic parties took the first steps for islamisation or I should rather say radicalization of the society. So along with the master of all evil Ziaul Haq, he was also responsible for the mess that the Pakistani society is in today.

Recommend 0

conservative

Mar 09, 2015 10:04am

@Zak do you remember any long term development programme initiated by Zia or Musharraf during their rule. They enjoyed on easy American and petro dollars due to Afghan conundrum, encouraged corruption and ruined Yves system which was no doubt already in shambles.

Recommend 0

waseem haider

Mar 09, 2015 10:16am

Long Live Pakistan ...Long Live Pak Army.. Love u Mushraf...

Recommend 0

Haider Rehman

Mar 09, 2015 01:54pm

Zia ul Haq was a very junior officer promoted to the most senior rank. It is no surprise he was as competent as he was.

Recommend 0

mjk

Mar 09, 2015 02:25pm

ZABHUTTO picked Zia over others because he was connivingly meek and insignificant general. Nawaz Sharif picked Musharraf an Urdu speaking mohajir over a Punjabi & Pathan generals, hoping that he would be a lesser threat to civilian government. In both cases it was other way around.

Recommend 0

salah khan

Mar 09, 2015 05:36pm

@Tahir Hameed ,correctly mentioned the whole country is in a mess, it cant be fixed.

Recommend 0

Branded Content

Why SQD-Mini LED is the display breakthrough we’ve been waiting for?

The display industry is entering a new phase, where reducing trade-offs is as important as pushing performance limits.

The Palms at Silk Gardens introduces a new family address in Karachi

The Palms places families at the heart of its vision, offering thoughtfully planned 2 and 3-bedroom units in a secure, peaceful and community-led environment.