Tale of two Sharifs: Why Nawaz and Shehbaz's congratulations to PM Modi were different in tone and tenor

Pakistan’s former premier and head of the Pakistan Muslim League (N) (PML (N)), Nawaz Sharif, congratulated Narendra Modi after he took the oath as the Indian prime minister for the third time. In a message posted on X, Nawaz Sharif wrote, “Your party’s success in recent elections reflects the confidence of the people in your leadership. Let us replace hate with hope and seize the opportunity to shape the destiny of two billion people of South Asia." Modi responded cautiously.

Appreciating the message, he stated, “The people of India have always stood for peace, security, and progressive ideas. Advancing the well-being and security of our people will always remain our priority." Clearly, the Reasi terrorist attack, in which nine pilgrims lost their lives and which occurred on the day of the swearing-in, May 9, was weighing on Modi’s mind.

Modi had invited Senior Sharif to his first oath-taking ceremony as PM in May 2014. Despite the opposition of the Pakistani army, Nawaz Sharif travelled to Delhi to attend the ceremony. The two had decided to embark on a process to normalise the bilateral relationship. The Pakistani generals had, however, put paid to the endevour initially through the Pathankot terrorist attack of January 2016 and, later that year, through the Uri terrorist attack.

If the Reasi terrorist attack was one signal from the Pakistani generals who would have been disheartened by the turnout in Kashmir in the elections, the other was the cold greeting of Nawaz Sharif’s brother and Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif. He posted on X, “Felicitations to Narendra Modi on taking oath as Prime Minister."

Besides, two days prior to Modi’s swearing in, Pakistan’s foreign ministry spokesperson put the onus on India to “create an environment conducive to the advancement of peace and dialogue and the resolution of long-standing disputes for mutual benefit”. The dispute is an obvious reference to Jammu and Kashmir, but the spokesperson took no chances. In her briefing, she referred to the constitutional changes in J&K on August 5, 2019 and repeated the Pakistani position that they had “vitiated the bilateral environment”. She also said that Pakistan had observed an increase in ‘vitriolic rhetoric’ [during the campaign].

The wide gap in the two Sharifs’ tone and tenor of greeting Modi is indicative of the gap between Pakistani official thinking and Nawaz Sharif’s desire for an improvement in the bilateral relationship. The official thinking of Pakistan towards India follows the path chosen by the military generals and not by the civilian politicians.

This thinking is reflected in the words of the Pakistani official spokesperson. Unlike his brother, Shehbaz Sharif does not buck the generals. At a time when he and the generals are on the same page to take on the continuing challenge of Imran Khan, Shehbaz Sharif will take all the more care of the generals’ views on their country’s approach to India under Modi 3.0.

Indeed, Shehbaz has learned from his brother’s experience and that of other Pakistani leaders—Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and Imran Khan—that taking on the generals is dangerous. All three suffered at their hands. Bhutto paid with his life, and Imran Khan, who, ironically, was promoted as a counter to Nawaz Sharif, was manoeuvred out of office by former army chief Qamar Bajwa in April 2022; he has spent a long period in jail thereafter.

This has been continuous since his supporters agitated against the army and destroyed the monuments of the martyrs on May 9, 2023. As was Imran Khan, so too were Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif promoted in politics by the army. Thus, all three were one-time army proteges who broke ranks and paid for their revolts.

The Sharifs’ ancestors hailed from the Kashmir valley and migrated from there to settle in Jati Umra village in Amritsar district. After partition, the family migrated to Pakistan, and Nawaz Sharif’s father, Mian Muhammad Sharif, achieved great success in business. He set up the Ittefaq Group with interests in sugar, steel, and agriculture. Bhutto nationalised Pakistan’s private industry, including the Ittefaq Group. However, General Ziaul Haq changed his policies, and the Sharifs’ bounced back.

The story goes that Punjab Governor Lt General Ghulam Jilani Khan was supplied with iron grills, etc., free of charge by the Sharifs, and he asked Muhammad Sharif for a son who could be taken under the army’s wings. He pointed to Nawaz Sharif, his eldest son. In 1981, while Zia ruled Pakistan, Nawaz became a minister in the Punjab provincial government and, in 1985, Chief Minister. He was laid-back but could be charming and yet earthy. He was clearly the army’s darling; it promoted his career. After Zia’s death in 1988, the army supported him to take on Benazir Bhutto, but he failed at the federal level. However, he continued as Punjab’s Chief Minister, which is the most important Pakistani province.

In the 1990 national elections, Nawaz Sharif succeeded Benazir Bhutto and became prime minister. He continued in office until 1993, when he fell out with President Ghulam Ishaq Khan. The then-army chief intervened. Nawaz was removed from office, and elections were announced. However, to be even handed the army, even though its relations with Nawaz had not been entirely smooth, also secured Khan’s resignation.

The 1993 elections were won by Benazir, who became prime minister, with Nawaz Sharif forced to become leader of the opposition. Benazir was removed from office in 1996 by President Farooq Leghari, and in the elections held in February 1997, Nawaz Sharif won and became Prime Minister.

In his second term, Nawaz Sharif wanted to become a true prime minister. This meant that he wanted to control Pakistan’s security and foreign policies, which the army considered its preserve. It is believed that with the assistance of his father, he made inroads among the generals and made some of them beholden to him. In early 1998, he took the boldest decision that any prime minister had taken. He asked army chief Jehangir Karamat to resign because of differences of opinion on the composition of the National Security Council. Karamat, who had an obvious commitment to the Pakistani constitution, followed Sharif’s bidding. In the context of Karamat’s dismissal, it is noteworthy that Bhutto too changed the top brass of the army in 1972, but that was a different time as Pakistan had recently tasted defeat in the 1971 war.

Karamat’s departure caused disquiet in the army, but Sharif’s decision was accepted. Army also accepted Sharif’s choice of the general to lead it—Lt Gen Pervez Musharraf, who was Muhajir and not the seniormost general. Clearly, Sharif felt that he would be secure because Musharraf’s Muhajir background would be a weakness for him. What he overlooked was that Karamat’s decision was his own, not that of the army as an institution.

Musharraf and the generals became unhappy with Nawaz’s desire to build bridges with India, which resulted in then Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s Lahore visit, the signing of the Lahore Declaration in February 1999, and the beginning of the Composite Dialogue process earlier in autumn 1998.

Musharraf and a clutch of generals decided to launch the Kargil operation even before Vajpayee’s visit and went ahead with it despite the visit. This was a ‘rogue’ operation. Nawaz Sharif was briefed about it after the Lahore Declaration, but perhaps he did not understand its real potential of undoing what he was attempting to do with India. Initially, when the operation began, he thought that the Pakistani army might succeed, and he did not stop Musharraf. At this stage, his father conveyed to him that if ‘Vajpayee Sahib feels that you have betrayed his trust, he is right’.

Despite all odds, the Indian army and diplomacy put Pakistan on the mat. President Clinton intervened and gave Pakistan no choice but to withdraw. But this intervention was only after Indian troops, at great sacrifice, had gone a long way in clearing the posts occupied by Pakistani troops on the Kargil heights. Pakistan’s humiliation set the stage for a Nawaz and Musharraf ‘war’. Nawaz dismissed Musharraf, but the army staged a coup. Musharraf became the government head and later president. He imprisoned the Sharif family except for Nawaz’s father, whom he respected. Finally, Musharraf allowed Nawaz and the rest of the Sharif clan to go into exile in Saudi Arabia in 1999.

Nawaz Sharif returned only in 2013, and his party won the election and he became Prime Minister. However, the army chief, Gen. Ashfaq Kayani, soon retired, and Nawaz chose Raheel Sharif to head the army, hoping that he would be loyal to him. This was not to be.

The relationship remained uneasy, and the army promoted Imran Khan against Nawaz, supporting his demonstrations from behind the scenes. The disclosure of the Panama papers in 2016 gave the army and elements in the Pakistani judiciary the opportunity to join hands to remove Nawaz Sharif from the PM’s chair and send him to jail along with his daughter Maryam Nawaz on criminal charges in 2017. It was only in 2019 that he was allowed to go to Britain for medical treatment. He remained there in exile till his return, facilitated by the army, in 2023.

Nawaz Sharif is now head of the party; he took over from Shehbaz on May 28. At almost 75, he is not the same man he was earlier. Besides, he is bitter about the way he was treated in 2016–17. He astutely pressed Shehbaz to appoint Asim Munir as army chief, who has an abiding hatred for Imran Khan. Munir will respect him, but it is clear from the dichotomy of the messages sent by him and Shehbaz to Modi that the army will not allow his approaches towards India to prevail.

Nawaz Sharif’s political career only illustrates the influence of the army in all aspects of Pakistan’s national destiny, especially the political one. That is the abiding truth about Pakistan.

The writer is a former Indian diplomat who served as India’s Ambassador to Afghanistan and Myanmar, and as secretary, the Ministry of External Affairs. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost’s views.