Why the Pakistan Army Is Involved in Politics:
Why the Pakistan Army Is Involved in Politics: An Elaborate Discussion
The involvement of the Pakistan Army in the country’s politics is a defining feature of its post-independence history. Unlike many democracies where the military remains strictly under civilian control, Pakistan's military has played a dominant and often decisive role in political, economic, and security affairs. This unique civil-military imbalance can be attributed to historical developments, institutional structures, geopolitical compulsions, and the perceived weaknesses of civilian leadership.
This elaborate discussion will analyze:
1. Historical Background
2. Institutional Strength of the Military
3. Weakness of Civilian Institutions
4. Geopolitical and Strategic Factors
5. Ideological Foundations and National Security Narrative
6. Economic Interests of the Military
7. Role of Judiciary and Bureaucracy in Supporting Military Rule
8. Popular Support and Media Influence
9. Military's Role in Elections and Civil Administration
10. Civil-Military Relations in the 21st Century
11. Future Scenarios: Can Military Exit Politics?
12. Conclusion: Towards Civilian Supremacy?
---
1. Historical Background
From the earliest days of Pakistan's formation in 1947, the military began to acquire a central role in statecraft. The assassination of Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan (1951), the death of founder Muhammad Ali Jinnah (1948), and the early demise of several civilian governments created a power vacuum that the military and civil bureaucracy filled.
Key Milestones:
1958: General Ayub Khan imposed the first military coup, establishing a precedent.
1977: General Zia-ul-Haq overthrew Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, initiating an era of Islamization and repression.
1999: General Pervez Musharraf ousted Nawaz Sharif in a bloodless coup and ruled till 2008.
These events normalized military intervention in politics and weakened democratic institutions.
---
2. Institutional Strength of the Military
The Pakistan Army is the country’s most organized, disciplined, and well-funded institution. It has consistently received priority in budget allocations, foreign aid (especially from the U.S. and China), and internal political support.
Characteristics:
Meritocratic Structure: Unlike the politicized civilian sectors, the army has efficient promotion and training mechanisms.
Parallel Institutions: The military has its own intelligence agencies (ISI, MI), economic conglomerates (Fauji Foundation, Army Welfare Trust), and influence over media and judiciary.
---
3. Weakness of Civilian Institutions
Civilian governments in Pakistan have often been marred by:
Corruption and Nepotism
Poor Governance
Intra-party Autocracy
Lack of Policy Continuity
This has allowed the military to project itself as a savior of the state during crises. Political instability and infighting among civilian leaders often pave the way for military intervention under the pretext of restoring order.
---
4. Geopolitical and Strategic Factors
Pakistan’s location in a volatile neighborhood—with India to the east, Afghanistan to the west, and China to the north—has made national security a dominant theme in its politics.
Key Aspects:
India-centric Security Doctrine: Since independence, tensions with India (especially over Kashmir) have kept the military at the forefront.
Afghanistan Factor: The military, especially the ISI, has played a central role in Afghan policy, including backing the Taliban.
U.S. and China Support: Foreign powers have often preferred dealing with the military for stability and security cooperation.
---
5. Ideological Foundations and National Security Narrative
The military has positioned itself as the guardian of Pakistan’s ideological and territorial boundaries.
Tools Used:
Islamization: Particularly during General Zia's rule, Islam was used to legitimize military rule and align with conservative forces.
Anti-India Rhetoric: Nationalism and hostility toward India are used to justify high defense budgets and military control.
Narrative Control: The military has a strong influence on school curricula, history textbooks, and national media narratives.
---
6. Economic Interests of the Military
The Pakistan military is also a major economic stakeholder.
Military-Owned Enterprises:
Fauji Foundation
Army Welfare Trust
Shaheen Foundation
Defence Housing Authorities (DHAs) These hold stakes in banking, agriculture, construction, education, and healthcare.
The military’s economic empire gives it financial independence, increasing its influence over civilian governments.
---
7. Role of Judiciary and Bureaucracy in Supporting Military Rule
Historically, both the judiciary and bureaucracy have played roles in legitimizing military takeovers.
Examples:
Doctrine of Necessity: Coined by Justice Munir in 1954 to justify the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly.
Validation of Coups: Courts have often declared military regimes “legal” or “necessary” for national stability.
Civil Bureaucracy: Many bureaucrats prefer working under military regimes due to clearer hierarchies and lack of political interference.
---
8. Popular Support and Media Influence
Despite its controversial role, the army has often enjoyed public support—partly due to its control over the narrative.
Reasons for Popularity:
Heroic Image: Military personnel are portrayed as patriotic defenders of the nation.
Failures of Politicians: Civilian corruption makes military rule seem preferable.
Media Control: The military influences television, newspapers, and social media through both censorship and propaganda.
---
9. Military's Role in Elections and Civil Administration
Even during democratic periods, the military influences:
Election Engineering: Via intelligence agencies and backdoor political deals.
Caretaker Governments: Influenced or chosen with military approval.
Policy Making: In areas like foreign affairs, India relations, nuclear policy, and Afghanistan.
The rise of hybrid regimes (civilian façade with military control) shows the military’s enduring power even without formal coups.
---
10. Civil-Military Relations in the 21st Century
Recent decades have seen a shift from direct military rule to behind-the-scenes control.
Notable Trends:
Hybrid Regimes: The rise and fall of Imran Khan’s government (PTI) was widely seen as orchestrated by the military.
Soft Coups: Using judicial decisions, media pressure, or electoral manipulation to control or remove civilian governments.
Digital Control: Increasing surveillance of dissenters, journalists, and activists through cyber units.
---
11. Future Scenarios: Can the Military Exit Politics?
Optimistic Scenario:
Civilian Institutions Strengthen: Improved governance, independent judiciary, and a vigilant press reduce military dominance.
Economic Stability: If the economy is stabilized and foreign policy normalized, the military may reduce its interference.
International Pressure: Global powers and financial institutions may push for true democratic governance.
Pessimistic Scenario:
Continued Civilian Failures: Persistent corruption and instability will justify further military involvement.
Geopolitical Crises: Border tensions or terrorism could provide pretexts for military dominance.
Deepening Militarization: Further expansion of the army’s economic and administrative role.
---
12. Conclusion: Towards Civilian Supremacy?
The entrenchment of the military in Pakistan's political system is both a symptom and a cause of weak civilian governance. While the military has offered stability at times, it has also undermined democratic evolution and perpetuated structural problems in governance.
The only path forward is true democratic reform—where the military is respected for its professional role in defense but kept out of politics. Civilian leaders must earn legitimacy through good governance, accountability, and institution-building, while civil society and media must continue pushing for democratic norms.
Ultimately, the future of civil-military relations in Pakistan depends on the collective will of its people, politicians, and institutions to uphold the principle of civilian supremacy in a democratic republic.
Comments