Every nation has a grand design, so does Pakistan. In Pakistan you cannot be a part of the grand strategy if you're not a 'yes-man' or a 'tout' or a 'blue eyed baby' of the establishment. Look at the political careers of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto or Nawaz Sharif or Imran Khan, they all have been protégés of dictators and are all guilty of supporting their basic democracies and referendums.
Our establishment has played a huge role in developing the present political structure of Pakistan. One needs to know how to sell 'one's soul' to become part of the establishment structure.
The main grand strategy is inconsistent, as far as civilian dispensation is concerned, the reason being that no civilian leadership's budgetary constraints can continue to provide and support the grand strategy of hot borders in the north and the south and within alongside improving the education, health, and social welfare conditions of the 200 million of the world's most poor population.
A nation is known by the quality of its HDI Human Development Index not the strength of its armored punch. Though I concede the regional history imposes its own curse and places huge demands on the national security apparatus. In our wildest imaginations none of the establishment pundits ever thought that 'we will be fighting armored battles with our own people and bombing them in our own land'.
Most of the people with an ounce of some self-respect would not keep their mouths shut as they would not accept 'yes-man' behavior. It is unbecoming of an intellectual not to be able to say what would change the destiny of our nation - we cannot win a war because of our limitations and lack of resources, we can ensure survival by curtailing extremism and reaching some kind of peaceful coexistent formula in the north and the south. On that the differences are huge. The mindsets are cemented and hardened. That is the real struggle that every civilian leadership has faced since day one. Munir doctrine of necessity since 1954 has not helped either.