IANS Analysis: Pak military draws legitimacy from nation's perpetual security crisis

New Delhi: Pakistan, a country beset by a myriad of internal and external challenges, has often found itself teetering on the edge of security crises.

These crises have not only shaped the nation's political landscape but have also played a pivotal role in legitimizing the pervasive influence of its military establishment.

Despite being a de facto military state, Pakistan's security scenario remains precarious, with the military exploiting this insecurity to cement its authority and control.

This article delves into the intricate dynamics of Pakistan's security crisis, the military's vested interests in perpetuating these crises, and the consequent political engineering that has stymied the nation's democratic aspirations.

Historical context: The military’s ascendancy

Since its inception in 1947, Pakistan has experienced a tumultuous political history characterised by intermittent military coups and prolonged periods of martial law. The military's ascendancy can be traced back to the early years of independence when the nascent state faced existential threats from both internal insurgencies and external conflicts, most notably with India.

The military, positioning itself as the guardian of Pakistan's sovereignty and integrity, gradually entrenched its influence in the political and administrative spheres.

The 1958 coup led by General Ayub Khan marked the beginning of direct military rule, which continued under various guises through subsequent decades.

The narrative of an ever-looming security threat, whether from neighbouring India, internal separatist movements, or global terrorism, has been a constant refrain used by the military to justify its dominance.

This narrative has been instrumental in creating a securitised state where the military’s role transcends traditional defence duties to encompass governance, economic management, and foreign policy.

Security crisis: A perpetual state of emergency

Pakistan’s security landscape is a complex web of threats ranging from insurgencies in Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa to terrorist activities orchestrated by groups like Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and sectarian violence.

Despite substantial military operations such as Operation Zarb-e-Azb and Operation Radd-ul-Fasaad, which were aimed at dismantling terrorist networks and restoring order, the country continues to grapple with sporadic attacks and unrest.

One might question how, despite such extensive military involvement and operations, the security scenario remains in the doldrums. The answer lies in the intricate interplay between the military's strategic interests and its need to maintain a facade of indispensability.

The perpetuation of a security crisis serves as a justification for the military's overarching presence in all facets of Pakistani society. This state of perpetual emergency ensures that the military remains the ultimate arbiter of national policy, thereby stifling democratic processes and civilian governance.

The military's involvement in political engineering is a well-documented phenomenon. From orchestrating coups to influencing electoral outcomes, the military has consistently manipulated the political process to ensure that civilian governments remain subservient to its agenda.

The creation of the Islami Jamhoori Ittehad (IJI) in the late 1980s, a political alliance aimed at countering Benazir Bhutto's Pakistan People's Party (PPP), is a prime example of the military’s covert political manoeuvring.

More recently, the military's influence was evident in the 2018 general elections, where Imran Khan's Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) emerged victorious amidst widespread allegations of electoral manipulation. The military’s support for Khan was perceived as a strategic move to install a pliant government that would align with its interests. This symbiotic relationship between the military and selected civilian leaders ensures that the military's hegemony remains unchallenged.

Operations and interventions: Garnering sympathy and control

The military’s operational interventions, often cloaked in the rhetoric of national security, serve dual purposes: addressing security threats and bolstering its image as the saviour of the nation.

High-profile operations against terrorist outfits and separatist groups are meticulously publicised to reinforce the narrative of the military's indispensability. These operations, while achieving tactical successes, often fail to address the root causes of militancy and insurgency, thereby ensuring the persistence of security challenges.

In addition to kinetic operations, the military’s involvement in non-traditional roles, such as disaster management and economic projects, further consolidates its image as a multifaceted institution crucial to national stability.

For instance, the military’s role in the construction of infrastructure projects under the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) not only underscores its economic clout but also its strategic importance in fostering Pakistan's economic development.

The military's vested interests extend beyond the realm of security into the economic domain. The military-industrial complex, comprising a vast network of businesses owned and operated by various military foundations, wields significant economic power.

Institutions such as the Fauji Foundation and the Army Welfare Trust have substantial stakes in sectors ranging from agriculture and real estate to banking and telecommunications.

This economic empire not only enriches the military elite but also creates a dependency on the military for economic stability and growth. The intertwining of military and economic interests ensures that any challenge to the military's dominance is perceived as a threat to national stability, thereby legitimising its continued intervention in civilian affairs.

Paradox of security and insecurity

The paradox of Pakistan's security crisis lies in the fact that despite the military's extensive involvement in security matters, the country remains ensnared in a web of insecurity. This paradox can be attributed to the military's strategic calculus, which views the perpetuation of security threats as a means to justify its overarching role.

The cyclical nature of security operations, followed by periods of relative calm and subsequent resurgence of violence, creates a perpetual state of insecurity that necessitates continuous military intervention.

Moreover, the military’s prioritisation of security over democratic governance has stymied the development of robust civilian institutions capable of addressing the root causes of insecurity.

The marginalisation of civilian law enforcement agencies and the judiciary has created a security apparatus heavily reliant on military solutions, often at the expense of human rights and civil liberties.

Addressing Pakistan’s security crisis necessitates a fundamental shift in the country's governance paradigm. The democratisation of Pakistan, characterised by robust civilian oversight of the military, is imperative for breaking the cycle of insecurity and military dominance.

Strengthening democratic institutions, empowering civilian law enforcement agencies, and fostering a culture of political accountability are essential steps toward achieving sustainable security.

The international community, particularly Pakistan’s allies and aid donors, also has a role to play in encouraging democratic reforms and civilian supremacy. Conditioning military aid on demonstrable progress in democratisation and human rights can incentivise the military to cede space to civilian governance.

The Pakistani security crisis, perpetuated by the military's vested interests and strategic calculus, underscores the delicate balance between security and democracy.

The military's exploitation of security threats to justify its dominance has created a paradoxical scenario where the pursuit of security engenders perpetual insecurity.

Breaking this cycle requires a concerted effort to democratise Pakistan’s political landscape, strengthen civilian institutions, and foster a culture of accountability and transparency.

Only through a genuine commitment to democratic governance and civilian oversight can Pakistan hope to achieve sustainable security and stability.

The path to this goal is fraught with challenges, but it is a journey that Pakistan must undertake to fulfil the aspirations of its people for peace, prosperity, and democratic governance.

Disclaimer: This story has not been edited by the Sakshi Post team and is auto-generated from syndicated feed.