It is difficult to fathom the civil-military relations in Pakistan and the obstacles encountered by politicians. The recent incarceration of Imran is a case in point
As one of South Asia's two nuclear powers, Pakistan gears up for parliamentary elections this coming Thursday. Key contenders, Pakistan Muslim League Nawaz (PMLN), and Pakistan People's Party, have unveiled their manifestos. Notably, a common theme emerges amid the manifestos – a commitment to long-term peace between India and Pakistan. Bhutto, in his policy paper, emphasizes the necessity of normalised relations with India for regional peace. Sharif's PML-N manifesto echoes this commitment but conditions it on a reversal of New Delhi's actions in Kashmir. Bhutto's manifesto uniquely prioritizes reforming the security state and overseeing intelligence agencies, while Sharif's PML-N seems to downplay these structural challenges, raising questions about strategic omissions in pursuit of electoral victory. Understanding these aspects becomes crucial in unravelling Pakistan's administrative complexities and persistent challenges.
Reflecting on Pakistan's history since its inception in 1947, the nation has grappled with the intricate balance between civilian governance and military influence, a challenge identified by Huntington that underscores the potential breakdown in civil-military relations, threatening democratic stability. Pakistan has been a nation in turmoil, serving as both a buffer state and a manipulated territory under Western influence. It has unfortunately become a breeding ground for individuals, initially termed as 'liberators,' but associated with terrorism.
Consequently, Pakistan is often referred to as Asia's conflict corridor in modern history. Pakistan's reality often diverges from the envisioned norm of civilian dominance in a democratic state, echoing Huntington's observation of weak and 'praetorian' civil institutions. This institutional deficiency creates a praetorian state, where social structures become politicized. Addressing these structural issues becomes imperative for Pakistan to navigate its democratic path effectively. The recent ten-year jail sentence handed to former Prime Minister Imran Khan, accused of disclosing state secrets to the public, exemplifies the unfortunate consequences of Pakistan's civil-military bureaucratic complex. This reflects a distressing and lethal historical pattern deeply rooted in Pakistani politics.
Imran Khan's incarceration, however, is not an isolated incident; numerous prominent Pakistani political figures have faced arrest and imprisonment throughout the nation's history. The fifth Prime Minister, Hussain Shaheed Suhrawardy, was detained in January 1962 on fabricated charges of "anti-state activities" for refusing to support military ruler General Ayub Khan. The ninth Prime Minister, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, faced arrest in 1974 on charges of plotting to assassinate a political opponent, ultimately leading to his execution on April 4, 1979. Benazir Bhutto, Pakistan's first woman prime minister, endured multiple arrests, including in 1985, facing house arrest, detention for denouncing military dictator Zia-ul Haq in 1986, and sentencing for corruption in 1999. Another former prime minister, Nawaz Sharif, experienced arrest after General Pervez Musharraf assumed power in 1999 and was later exiled for a decade. In 2018, he was sentenced to 10 years in prison for corruption and, in December, to seven years in prison. Shahid Khaqan Abbasi, another former prime minister, was arrested in July 2019 in connection with an LNG corruption case but was later released on bail.
Imran garnered recognition for vociferously condemning U.S. interference in internal affairs, stressing the unsustainability of military policies and financial improprieties within the ruling elite. The WikiLeaks revelations underscored his belief that internal unrest within the military could lead the country into chaos. In his book, "Pakistan - A Personal History," Khan highlighted the ruling elite's two-faced allegiance to the U.S. Embassy, expressing discontent with Pakistan's perceived dependence as a "beggar and borrower."
This narrative unveils the intricate dynamics shaping Pakistan's relations with external powers, significantly influencing its political trajectory. Khan's foreign policy vision emphasises sovereignty and comprehensive reviews with neighbouring countries, particularly India, urging dispute resolution through political dialogue and the restraint of intelligence activities. He asserts that only a government with credibility and sovereignty can effectively prevent terrorism from originating on Pakistani soil in the future, critiquing Muslim leaders who compromise with the U.S. and pointing out a lack of courage or genuine understanding in the West regarding this intricate relationship.
Interestingly, according to recently declassified CIA assessments in the mid-80s, Pakistani military officials hold ambivalent views on Islamabad's close ties with Washington. While they appreciate the contribution of U.S. defence assistance to Pakistan's strengthening, many officials, especially at junior and mid-levels, identify more with the Islamic world. This stems from the perception that U.S. Middle East policy is anti-Islamic, and past U.S. arms embargoes have bred distrust among younger officers. The trial and conviction of Imran Khan are pivotal in understanding Pakistan's complex and harsh political reality. When a state prioritizes serving foreign forces over its national interests, it reflects a profound crisis in national identity. That is why, to understand the root causes of Pakistan's civil-military bureaucratic complex, it is crucial to delve briefly into the early challenges faced by the nation. Imagining a scenario where a nation established by a man known as 'the best-dressed man' becomes a metaphorical naked nation raises profound questions about Pakistan's history and its formation. Jinnah's journey, from his Hindu roots to becoming a central figure in the creation of Pakistan, raises doubts about whether the birth of Pakistan was a mere coincidence or the result of a grand convention.
Jinnah's identity was significantly shaped by his father, Jinabhai Panjai Thakkar, a Gujarati Hindu who converted to Islam. At a 1940 Muslim League meeting in Lahore, Jinnah highlighted the challenge of Hindus understanding Islam and Hinduism, emphasising the difficulty of achieving a common nation. The conflicting beliefs and duality among Pakistan's founders led to the creation of a confused nation. Post-independence, Jinnah considered shifting to Bombay for a peaceful end, but Pakistani authorities thwarted the plan, fearing it would undermine the nation's foundation. His daughter, Dina, chose to stay in Bombay, marrying into the well-known Parsi Wadia family. Intriguingly, Jinnah's ancestral village, Moti Paneli, in Gujarat's Saurashtra, lies 80 km from Porbandar, Mahatma Gandhi's birthplace, making Saurashtra the only region to birth both Jinnah and Gandhi as fathers of their nations.
In the immediate post-independence era, Pakistan faced challenges like the divisive division between eastern and western sectors, communal riots, and a leadership crisis. The weakened Muslim League saw a rise in military and civil bureaucratic power, marked by internal divisions and the unconstitutional dissolution of the government between 1953 and 1958. The officially sponsored Pakistani Republican Party and prolonged Constitution drafting added to political fragility, leading to the ironic abrogation of the Constitution in 1958. General Iskandar Mirza's martial law paved the way for Ayub Khan's tenure, followed by General Yahya Khan in 1969. This phase witnessed political fluctuations, clashes with the civil service and military largely governing. The recurrent military involvement in civilian rule, from Ayub to Musharraf, reflects a unique dynamic, where military control is downplayed during civilian rule, acknowledging the prime minister's supremacy. The post-independence army, predominantly Muslim, showed ethnic disparities, and its increasing role in civil administration highlights the intricate interplay shaping Pakistan's political trajectory.
In the context of Pakistan's upcoming elections, the likelihood of a significant change in the current system remains uncertain. The new government may face immediate challenges and internal turmoil, while external influences on political and security matters are expected to complicate the situation. The prevailing reality underscores a deceptive use of democracy by politicians known for empty promises. Pakistan grapples with critical issues, including 23 million out-of-school children aged five to sixteen, ranking second globally. The intensity of deprivation is 51.7 per cent, indicating the average deprivation score among those in multidimensional poverty. With a 6.3% unemployment rate, rebuilding the deteriorated state for the new government seems daunting. If the root causes of its dilapidation are addressed, it could be a turning point, fostering hope for India and Pakistan to come to the table for lasting peace and stability in South Asia.
(The writer is a Sri Lankan journalist and worked as a communications consultant for the Government of Sri Lanka. Views are personal)