Why is there no military coup in India but multiple in Pakistan? | Part 02/02 Faisal Warraich

Summary

This video script delves into the historical and political reasons behind the absence of martial law in India and its prevalence in Pakistan. It highlights how British colonial policies shaped the Indian Army, focusing on 'martial races' and creating a divide. Post-independence, India's first PM, Jawaharlal Nehru, implemented reforms to democratize the military, preventing coups. In contrast, Pakistan's military, burdened by inherited economic strains and a focus on military power over economic development, led to repeated martial laws. The script also touches on the impact of linking border disputes with trade, suggesting a need for policy reforms and a shift towards transparency and people-centric governance for Pakistan's progress.

Takeaways

• 🗣️ The script discusses the historical context of military control and political stability in India and Pakistan, highlighting the differences in how each country's military has influenced governance.
• 🏹 The British colonial strategy of recruiting from 'martial races' in India created a divide that influenced the military's role post-independence.
• 🔄 Jawaharlal Nehru's reforms in the Indian military after 1947 aimed to democratize and decentralize power, preventing military coups and ensuring civilian control.
• 🚩 The script contrasts India's successful 'coup-proofing' of its military with Pakistan's history of martial laws, suggesting structural and policy differences as key factors.
• 💼 The Indian military's structure, with commanders reporting to the Ministry of Defense and not having their own corps, reduces the likelihood of a military coup.
• 🔎 The Indian Intelligence Bureau's role in monitoring military officers ensures transparency and accountability, further preventing undemocratic military actions.
• 🏛️ The script reflects on Pakistan's economic struggles, linking them to the burden of military spending and a focus on military power over economic development.
• 🌐 Pakistan's foreign policy, which has historically leveraged its military for financial aid, contrasts with India's more balanced approach to international relations.
• 💡 The speaker calls for policy changes in Pakistan, advocating for transparent processes, economic policies, and a move away from waiting for a 'savior' to address national issues.
• 🌟 The script concludes with a call to action for introspection and change in Pakistan, emphasizing the importance of truth and self-reflection for progress.

Q & A

Why did Lt. Gen. S.D. Verma and General Thimayya take a boat out in Nagin Lake for a conversation?

They were afraid of the Intelligence Bureau's spies, indicating a lack of trust in the security of their communications on land.

Why did India not experience martial law after gaining independence, unlike Pakistan, Burma, and Bangladesh?

India implemented significant reforms in its military structure and policy, which included removing the Army Chief from the cabinet, abolishing martial races, and reorganizing the army into commands with commanders promoted by the Ministry of Defense, making a coup difficult to execute.

What was the British strategy for the Indian Army during the colonial period?

The British recruited soldiers from certain races and regions considered 'martial races' to create an army loyal to the colonial masters, using a 'divide and rule' strategy to maintain control.

What reforms did Jawaharlal Nehru implement to prevent a military coup in India?

Nehru implemented reforms such as removing the Army Chief from the cabinet, abolishing martial races, reducing military salaries, reorganizing the army into commands, and ensuring the army chief had no corps of his own, thus preventing the imposition of martial law.

How did the Indian Intelligence Bureau (IB) play a role in 'coup-proofing' the military?

The IB was responsible for spying on military officers, keeping tabs on key serving and retired officers, and reporting directly to the Prime Minister, which helped monitor and prevent any potential coup attempts.

Why did Pakistan face martial laws while India did not?

Pakistan inherited a large military and economic strain, sought external aid, and linked its military power to foreign relations, which led to a focus on military strength over economic development and political stability, making it more susceptible to martial laws.

What was the impact of the partition on the military and economic situation of Pakistan?

Partition led to Pakistan inheriting a disproportionate military and economic burden, which it struggled to manage, leading to repeated requests for aid and a focus on military strength over economic development.

How did Pakistan's approach to territorial disputes with India affect its economy?

Pakistan's linking of territorial disputes with trade led to a halt in social, economic, and diplomatic cooperation with India, which negatively impacted its economy and limited its potential for growth.

What is the significance of the reforms and policies implemented by Nehru in shaping the role of the military in India's democracy?

Nehru's reforms and policies, such as reducing the VIP status of military officers and 'coup-proofing' the military, were significant in ensuring the military's role was supportive of democracy rather than a threat to it.

What are the two short solutions proposed for Pakistan's progress mentioned in the script?

The solutions proposed are making all policies in the parliament with open debate for the betterment of the people, and stopping the wait for a savior by focusing on transparent processes instead.

Outlines

00:00

🏹 Historical Context and British Colonial Strategy

The paragraph discusses the historical context of the Indian subcontinent's military and political landscape post-independence. It highlights Lt. Gen. S.D. Verma's service in the Indian army during the 1950s and his friendship with General Thimayya. The narrative then shifts to the broader regional context, contrasting India's avoidance of martial law with the experiences of Pakistan, Burma, and Bangladesh. The British colonial strategy of creating a loyal imperial army by recruiting from certain 'martial races' is explained, which resulted in an army that was not representative of the entire country and could be used to suppress the population. The paragraph concludes with the significant reforms initiated by Jawaharlal Nehru after India's independence, aimed at transforming the army into a more inclusive and democratic institution.

05:06

🛡️ Reforms and Reorganization of the Indian Army

This paragraph delves into the reforms and reorganization of the Indian Army post-independence, emphasizing the steps taken to prevent military coups. It details how Nehru's reforms demoted the Army Chief from the cabinet, restructured the army into commands with commanders promoted by the Ministry of Defense, and abolished the concept of 'martial races' to allow for nationwide recruitment. The paragraph also outlines the checks and balances in place, such as the Army Chief needing to consult with other generals and the Indian Intelligence Bureau's oversight of military officers. The narrative contrasts India's civilian control over the military with Pakistan's military dominance in intelligence and policy matters, highlighting the 'coup-proofing' measures that have contributed to India's political stability.

10:07

💼 Economic Struggles and Military Dependence in Pakistan

The paragraph explores the economic challenges faced by Pakistan since its inception, focusing on the disproportionate allocation of resources to the military. It discusses how Pakistan's leaders sought financial aid from the United States, marketing the country's military as a strategic asset in the Cold War. The narrative critiques the country's focus on military power at the expense of economic and cultural development, leading to a 'garrison state' perception. It also touches on the consequences of linking border disputes with trade, contrasting Pakistan's approach with that of other nations that maintain trade despite territorial disagreements. The paragraph concludes with a call for introspection and a shift towards truth and transparent processes for national progress.

15:10

🌏 Geopolitical Isolation and Economic Missteps

This paragraph continues the discussion on Pakistan's economic and geopolitical challenges, emphasizing the country's historical isolation due to territorial disputes and a heavy military budget. It points out that Pakistan did not reduce its armed forces even after the 1971 split, which exacerbated economic burdens. The paragraph also criticizes the country's approach to linking trade with border disputes, contrasting it with other nations that separate economic relations from territorial conflicts. The narrative suggests that this has contributed to Pakistan's economic struggles and over-reliance on the International Monetary Fund (IMF) loans. The paragraph ends with a reflection on the need for policy reforms and a move away from waiting for a 'savior' leader, advocating for transparent and people-centric governance.

20:14

🌱 Call for Transparent Governance and National Progress

The final paragraph is a call to action for Pakistan, urging for a shift in policy-making towards transparency, economic pragmatism, and peaceful international relations. It critiques the past illusions of expecting a single leader to solve all problems and emphasizes the importance of processes over individual leaders. The paragraph suggests that policies should be made through open debate in parliament, with the primary goal of improving the lives of the people. It also encourages the audience to engage in open debate and to seek truth as a path to progress, offering a hopeful note for the future of Pakistan.

Keywords

💡Martial Law

Martial law refers to the imposition of direct military control over civilian functions of government, typically in response to a temporary emergency such as invasion or major disaster, or in an occupied territory. In the context of the video, it discusses why India never experienced martial law, unlike Pakistan, Burma, and Bangladesh. The video suggests that India's political and military structure, established after independence, was designed to prevent such occurrences.

💡Military Coups

A military coup is an attempt by a faction of the military to seize control of government, usually by force. The video contrasts India's history with that of Pakistan, where military coups have occurred. It raises the question of why Pakistan faced martial laws and coups while India did not, suggesting that the structure of the Indian military and its relationship with the government played a crucial role in preventing such events.

💡Divide and Rule

The 'divide and rule' concept refers to a strategy employed by the British colonial administration to maintain control by dividing the population along ethnic, religious, or regional lines. The video explains how the British categorized certain 'martial races' for recruitment into the army, creating a force that was loyal to the colonial power rather than to India as a whole, which had implications for the potential of military coups post-independence.

💡Jawaharlal Nehru

Jawaharlal Nehru was the first Prime Minister of India and a pivotal figure in its independence movement. The video credits Nehru with implementing reforms that 'coup-proofed' the Indian military, such as removing the Army Chief from the cabinet and reorganizing the military command structure. These actions are presented as key to preventing military intervention in politics.

💡Martial Races

The term 'martial races' was used by the British to designate certain ethnic groups in India as being naturally warlike and suitable for military service. The video discusses how the British recruitment strategy from these groups created an army that was less representative of India's diversity, which Nehru later addressed by reforming recruitment policies to include all regions.

💡Intelligence Bureau (IB)

The Intelligence Bureau (IB) is India's internal intelligence agency. The video mentions the IB's role in monitoring military officers to prevent coups, illustrating the checks and balances in place to ensure civilian control over the military. It contrasts this with Pakistan, where the military has more influence over intelligence services.

💡Army Reorganization

The video details the reorganization of the Indian Army into multiple commands, each with its commander, as part of Nehru's reforms. This restructuring was intended to prevent any single military figure from gaining too much power and to ensure that decisions were made collectively, reducing the risk of a military coup.

💡Economic Burden

The video discusses the economic strain that maintaining a large military can place on a nation, using Pakistan as an example. It explains how the inherited military budget and the focus on military power over economic development contributed to Pakistan's economic struggles and its reliance on foreign aid and loans.

💡IMF Loans

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) provides financial assistance to countries in economic difficulty. The video notes Pakistan's frequent use of IMF loans, suggesting that the country's economic policies and military expenditures have led to a reliance on external financial support.

💡Garrison State

A garrison state is a term used to describe a nation with a large, dominant military establishment, often at the expense of other sectors. The video uses this term to describe Pakistan's focus on military power, suggesting that this focus has come at the cost of broader national development and has influenced its international image and relations.

Highlights

Lt. Gen. S.D. Verma's friendship with General Thimayya and their secret boat conversation due to fear of Intelligence Bureau spies.

India's unique position in the region as the only country that never experienced martial law despite gaining independence around the same time as Pakistan and Burma.

The historical context of military coups in Sri Lanka and the failure of such an attempt, contrasting with India's stability.

The British colonial strategy of creating an imperial army by recruiting from certain 'martial races' in India, leading to an unrepresentative force.

Jawaharlal Nehru's significant reforms post-independence, aiming to transform the Indian Army into a more democratic and representative institution.

The removal of the Army Chief from the cabinet and the reorganization of the military commands to prevent any single individual's autocratic control.

The abolition of the concept of 'martial races' and the opening of army recruitment to all regions of India, promoting inclusivity.

The Indian Intelligence Bureau's role in monitoring military officers to prevent coups, directly reporting to the Prime Minister.

The economic challenges faced by Pakistan from its inception, leading to an over-reliance on military power for financial support.

Pakistan's historical attempts to secure military aid from the U.S., reflecting its strategic approach to international relations.

The impact of partition on Pakistan's economy and military, with the country inheriting a disproportionate share of military responsibilities.

The detrimental effects of linking border disputes with trade, contrasting Pakistan's approach with that of other nations.

The missed opportunities for Indo-Pak cooperation and the role of military adventurism in stalling diplomatic progress.

The call for transparent processes and policies in Pakistan, emphasizing the importance of democratic debate and the avoidance of savior complexes.

The speaker's personal reflections on Pakistan's challenges and the need for a focus on truth and progress over illusions.

Transcripts

How are you friends?

Lt. Gen. S.D. Verma served in the Indian army in 1950s.

He was a close friend of the then Army Chief General Thimayya.

He said they had to take a boat out in Nagin Lake for a frank conversation.

Because they were afraid of the Intelligence Bureau's spies.

But this little incident was the tip of the iceberg.

Now India and Pakistan got independence in 1947.

Pakistan, Burma and Bangladesh all suffered martial laws.

But in India, the largest country in the region, martial law was never imposed.

Why?

Even a military coup took place Sri Lanka in 1966.

But this attempt failed.

The leader of the coup General Richard and his collaborators were arrested.

But this is a million dollar question that why did Pakistan face martial laws?

While India never experienced martial law.

Rather, there was no coup attempt. Let's find the answer to this question.

It all started with the colonization of India by the British.

The British needed an imperial army instead of a people's army.

They needed this army to protect their colonial interests.

They needed the army to be loyal to its colonial masters.

That's why they adopted a careful strategy.

They decided to recruit soldiers from certain races and regions.

The British divided the regions of India into martial and non-martial races.

Sikhs, Muslim Punjabis, Hindu Jats, Dogras, Gorkhas, Gharwals, Pathans and Afridis were martial races.

Most of the Indian army came from these races.

Majority of the recruits came from Punjab's Pothohar or the northern areas.

Nepali Gurkhas also formed a considerable portion of the Indian army.

Its representation from the rest of India was negligible.

The British did this on purpose.

The soldiers thus recruited felt little sympathy for their fellow countrymen.

They could even shoot civilians without hesitation.

Because this force didn't represent the whole country. It only belonged to a small portion.

The British wanted to transform the army into a cult and groom it separately from the country.

It was the same 'divide and rule' formula.

That's how they ruled India.

So the British imposed this rule in India, the biggest colony of the Empire.

The British had recruited unbalanced armies in other colonies too.

In Togo, Ghana and Nigeria, the largest portion of the armies came from northern regions.

Mostly Sunnis were recruited for the army despite the Shia majority in Iraq.

It was the same 'divide and rule' formula.

But in British India, things changed after the elections in 1946.

Jawaharlal Nehru became the head of the government of united India.

He was made the Vice President of the Viceroy's Executive Council.

This office was equal to the PM.

Nehru wrote a letter to the C-in-C of the army and the Defense Secretary on September 12.

The letter called for massive reforms of the Indian Army.

These were big reforms.

These reforms were about to transform the Indian Army.

Nehru was told that his demands would change the entire structure of the army.

But Nehru was determined to do that.

That's why he had written that letter.

He stressed the need of reforms to save the Indian democracy.

That's why after the partition of India, he implemented those reforms.

These were very important reforms.

Now you will understand why India never faced a military coup?

And why did Pakistan, Bangladesh and Burma faced military coups?

The Army Chief was removed from the cabinet.

His office was placed under the Secretary of the Ministry of Defence.

Earlier, COAS was the 2nd highest post after Governor-General and also part of the Executive Council.

Jawaharlal Nehru ended this arrangement.

Another revolutionary order was issued on February 1, 1949.

The order abolished the martial races and allowed recruitment from all over the country.

The Military's salaries were also cut short.

It was ensured that nobody should consider the consider the army job as the best.

Then the army was reorganized into 4 commands.

Though it already had a proper command structure, yet all this was reorganized.

Each command had a commander.

They were promoted by the Ministry of Defense.

Now India has 7 commands and 7 commanders.

One of them is Army Training Command.

Lieutenant generals lead these commands as commanding-in-chiefs.

All these generals have equal status and even the Army Chief is the first among equals.

As it happens in our judiciary.

So if army chief wants to take any action he has to convince these generals first.

He can't order them to do his bidding.

Army chief takes decisions in consultation with them.

These commanding chiefs are directly in touch with the Secretary of the Ministry of Defence.

Even they first contact the Defense Secretary to have an appointment with the Defense Minister.

Their promotions and pensions and financial matters are also looked after by the Ministry of Defence.

The army chief has no corps of his own so he can't impose martial law.

And even he can't appoint the commanding officers.

He can't use his loyalists and plan martial law.

Indian Intelligence Bureau (IB) i also responsible to spy on military officers.

The IB keeps tabs on key serving and retired officers.

The IB directly reports to the Prime Minister.

Even the India's top intelligence agency RAW has the same power structure.

It is not mandatory to appoint a military head of RAW.

In Pakistan, the army decided these matters.

It give the names of corps commanders and the ISI chief.

Entire staff of these organizations belong to the army.

This staff is answerable only to the Army Chief.

Whereas in India it is not so.

Even today the chief of RAW is a bureaucrat "Samant Kumar Goel".

Even its key posts aren't necessarily held by retired officers.

Any bureaucrat or an expert may hold these positions.

While in Pakistan, the intelligence chief is also a serving major general or a lieutenant general.

All his staff is also comprised of serving military officers.

We just want to tell what steps were taken to avoid military coup in India.

Better performance isn't our topic for now.

Even it is the military that provides security to government functionaries including the PM.

The army is also responsible for the security of the nuclear assets.

That's why the military enjoys a certain sanctity among the people.

Whereas in India there is a separate force for the security of the PM and the President.

It reduces the chances of a military coup.

Few people can't decide to arrest the entire state leadership.

Similarly, a separate force protects the country's nuclear assets.

This force is also under the political government.

Nehru made many such reforms which slowed the Indian army.

However, it undermined the military's ability to impose martial law for good.

This is historically referred to as "coup-proofing" the military.

This is what India did.

That's why the Indian army can't impose martial law.

No army chief can do this even if he wants to.

Because it is hard to convince 7 different commanders and gain loyalties of their corps.

It is also impossible to hide all this from the IB.

This was the reorganization process.

Nehru also reduced the protocol and VIP status of military officers.

Before partition, a British commander-in-chief lived a luxurious life.

A grand bungalow on 30 acres (240 canals) was reserved for his residence in Delhi.

This white marble building reflected grandeur.

It was called Teen Murti Bhavan.

After independence, Nehru shifted the army chief to a smaller house.

He made Teen Murti Bhavan his own residence.

Today it is called the Nehru Museum.

These examples show how serious was Nehru to redefine the military's role in a democratic India.

He wanted to save the country from martial law.

Even the biographies of many former Indian army chiefs reflect this approach.

These general didn't like the political class. Yet they were unable to impose martial law.

The Indian Army had political ambitions in the past.

In 1957, Nehru visited the army headquarters.

He had won 2 consecutive elections.

General Thimayya was the Army Chief.

Panditji saw a big cupboard with 3 compartments.

He asked General Thimaya about them.

General Thamayya told that the first contained the army war plans

The 2nd compartment contained classified information about top military officers.

PM Nehru asked what was in the 3rd compartment?

General Thumaya replied the compartment contained plans to overthrow the government.

An uncomfortable silence fell in the room. Nehru silently moved out of the room.

Every military does this study.

So, Nehru and his team were working on reforms in the Indian Army even before partition.

They maintained the balance.

He was successful. Now the Indian army is a people's army under a Defense Minister.

The Chinese Army is also a People's Army controlled by the Communist Party.

So that's another difference.

Then look at it from another angle.

Pakistan suffered an economic injustice from the day one.

It put an unnecessary economic strain on the newly created state.

Pakistan was given less resources for a big military.

Pakistan inherited 30% British Indian Army.

It got 40% Navy and 20% Air Force.

But surprisingly, it got only 17% resources to meet the military expenses.

So from the very first day the country faced a huge financial burden.

But something had to be done.

So, Pakistan sought U.S. aid right after its creation.

It happened in September 1947.

Quaid-e-Azam demanded $2 billion in aid from the U.S.

He also sent Mir Laiq Ali to America for this purpose.

The U.S. only issued $10 million.

This aid was issued from the U.S. war assets.

The U.S. also asked Pakistan to contact the Import Export Bank.

The IMF of today.

The Pakistanis also gave a long list of military needs to the Americans.

It asked for $170 million for the army and $75 million for the air force.

It demanded $60 million for the navy.

Pakistan had also given a list of advanced weapons to the U.S.

The list included hundreds of fighter jets, 200 trainer aircrafts, ships, transport cruises, gunboats and 3 submarines.

It was a very long list but the U.S. politely refused again.

Pakistan's demands were based on a wrong assumption.

Pakistan thought that it was the sole potential ally of the U.S. from Turkey to Japan.

Pakistan believed that India would side with Soviet Russia in the Cold War.

Nehru with his socialist ideals would bring his country closer to Soviet Russia.

So Pakistan was America's only option in this region from Turkey to Japan.

America could police this region with Pakistan's support.

After Quaid-e-Azam, his successor Liaquat Ali Khan did the same.

Even General Ayub Khan followed the suit.

All of them marketed their military power to America against Soviet Russia.

In September 1953, General Ayub Khan and Iskandar Mirza had become the center of power.

Liaquat Ali Khan was martyred, General Ayub visited America.

The Americans showed him their barracks and other military installations.

But General Ayub kept on convincing him to help modernize the Pakistan Army.

He wanted the Pakistan army to help the U.S. against a communist revolution.

In simple words, they didn't want Russia to get access to warm waters.

That's why General Ayub wanted America to use the Pakistani army.

Ayub Khan was following the British colonial concept of ''warm waters.''

General Hameed Gul also adopted this concept in his political and semi-military life.

However, the Americans didn't listen to General Ayub Khan.

They kept on showing him their barracks and cantonments.

General Ayub khan got fed up. One day he walked into the room of Assistant Secretary of State Henry Berwad.

He said, "For Christ's sake, I'm not here to see the barracks,"

"Our army can be your army if you choose. But let's make a decision."

This is just one example.

Dennis Cook has written a book on the history of U.S.-Pakistan relations.

He has mentioned many such events right after the creation of Pakistan.

These event will help you understand the problems in our foundations.

We have told you these events in short.

Now you know that we couldn't focus on building a strong economy.

We only focused on using our military in the wars of other powers for financial benefits.

We paid relatively little attention to commercial, cultural and political spheres.

The result is before us now.

Even today, our political leadership has little influence with other countries.

A military contact is more important.

The world only considers us a garrison state and not a nation of 220 million opportunities.

That's why our economy continued to struggle and we faced repeated martial laws.

This is the answer to the Million Dollar Question in Pakistan.

Now let's talk about another very important point.

Why is our economy constantly burdened by the IMF and debt?

Why have we received 22 loan programs from the IMF.

We have also taken loans from America, China, Arab countries and Japan etc.

We took 22 loans only from the IMF.

Perhaps Pakistan is the number one recipient of IMF loans.

The major reason is the burden of military budget that Pakistan inherited on the day one.

And Quaid-e-Azam was forced to send a delegation to America for aid.

Even in terms of industrial structure, Pakistan was at a disadvantage from the beginning.

It didn't inherit a single big industrial city from British India.

Calcutta, Bombay and Madras (Chennai), all went to India.

So Pakistan had to do everything afresh.

Pakistan was a new country, while India was the same old country with all its infrastructure intact.

Then it happened that in 1971, when Pakistan was split into two countries.

Even then it didn't reduced the number of its armed forces.

However, both the geography and the population were greatly reduced.

So once again the military budget was a huge economic burden.

It was a point.

Then we made a 2nd mistake and persisted in it.

We linked border disputes with our neighbors to trade.

Now see why this was a mistake?

All other countries handle their geographical disputes differently.

They don't stop trade despite their disputes.

China is technically at war with Taiwan.

But its trade volume with Taiwan is over $189 billion annually.

Even tourism isn't barred.

Similarly, China has clashed with India several times.

There are 10 major geographical disputes including Arunachal, Sikkim, Tibet and Aksai Chin.

10 big disputes.

Yet their mutual trade is worth $140 billion.

America got its independence by fighting Great Britain, yet their trade continues.

Their trade volume was over $270 billion in 2021.

Likewise, before the Ukraine invasion, Russia-America trade had reached $28 billion.

Donald Trump was even planning to build a Trump Tower in Moscow.

You can see this story here.

This is the same with England and France, Germany and France.

All these are enemies of the past and rivals of the present.

But the trade between them is worth billions of dollars.

Because they have learned from their mistakes while we are repeating those mistakes

In contrast, Pakistan and India are more sensitive about their territorial disputes.

They have even stopped social, economic and diplomatic cooperation.

In February 1999, Indian PM Vajpayee visited Lahore.

He recognized Pakistan and said good things about moving forward and also recited poetry.

But General Musharraf's failed Kargil adventure destroyed this opportunity.

After that, every attempt to improve Indo-Pak relations ended with distrust.

And now in Narendra Modi's India there is no room for any progress.

Alas, backward societies deal even the foreign policy with emotions.

While developed countries work separately on both conflict resolution and trade.

They handle every problem in its particular domain.

So, my curious fellows, the reasons we have put before you are my personal views.

Neither are these conclusive, nor would I say that there aren't other reasons.

These are my sincere personal feelings for my dear motherland Pakistan.

I want to see Pakistan move forward.

I don't want to cheat my country fellows through propaganda and false claims.

I stand for truth no matter how bitter it may be.

Because only truth is the road to progress.

Illusions and dreams don't give you progress.

We all should ponder over this situation.

How did the Autumn take over the Spring?

Where did we take a wrong turn?

We discussed all these problems. We need to make another Vlog to present the solutions.

I only mention two short solutions here.

We should make all our policies in the parliament with open debate.

The only purpose of these policies should be the betterment of the people.

These policies shouldn't be made to promote a certain theory or promote old rivalries.

The policies should be economical and peaceful not egoistic.

We should also stop waiting for a savior.

No political leader should be considered a savior.

These are the illusions from the past.

We assume that a powerful leader will end all our problems.

Weak people invented such misconceptions for moral support.

Today we all know that there is no such leader who can solve all the problems.

So we should stress more on a transparent process rather than saviors.

Transparent voting, transparent court, transparent budget.

Any thing that is hidden is cheating with the people.

We thank you in the end for watching these 2 long videos.

This is an open debate, you can give your opinion on that.

Inform us of your queries and we will make more vlogs on that.

You can watch our interesting documentary on history of Pakistan here.

Here you can watch the great game between America, Russia and China.

Watch the story of the Google Robot that thinks like humans, here.