Civil-Military Relations in Pa

Cheatsheet Content

### Introduction Civil-military relations (CMR) in Pakistan have historically been characterized by military dominance over civilian institutions. This dynamic has profoundly shaped the country's political landscape, governance, and foreign policy. While there have been periods of civilian ascendancy, the military has consistently reasserted its influence, often through direct interventions or by operating as a powerful, unelected arbiter. The military's institutional strength, organizational coherence, and perception as the guardian of national interests (especially concerning security threats from India and internal extremism) have contributed to its entrenched position. Civilian governments, conversely, have often struggled with issues of legitimacy, internal divisions, and economic instability, providing openings for military intervention or enhanced influence. ### Historical Context Pakistan's history is punctuated by military coups in 1958, 1969, 1977, and 1999. Even during civilian rule, the military has maintained significant control over key policy areas such as defense, foreign policy, and internal security. * **Ayub Khan (1958-1969):** First military dictator, established the precedent of military rule. * **Yahya Khan (1969-1971):** Oversees the secession of East Pakistan (Bangladesh) after the 1971 war, a major blow to military prestige but not its power. * **Zia-ul-Haq (1977-1988):** Imposed martial law, oversaw the Islamization process, and played a critical role in the Afghan-Soviet War. This era deeply institutionalized the military's role in policymaking. * **Pervez Musharraf (1999-2008):** Seized power in a bloodless coup, aligning Pakistan with the U.S. in the "War on Terror," which further enhanced the military's resources and strategic importance. This cyclical pattern of military intervention and withdrawal has prevented the full consolidation of democratic institutions and norms. ### Recent Developments (2018-2022) The period between 2018 and 2022, primarily under the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) government led by Imran Khan, witnessed a complex and evolving phase in civil-military relations, often described as a "hybrid regime." * **Perceived Alignment (2018-2021):** Initially, the PTI government was widely perceived as being brought to power with significant military backing. Critics and analysts often referred to it as a "selected" government, implying military engineering of the electoral process. For instance, journalist and analyst Cyril Almeida noted the "uneasy collaboration" between civilian and military leadership during this period. The military was seen as having a strong hand in policy decisions, particularly on foreign policy, security, and economic matters, often through the National Security Committee (NSC). * **Growing Tensions (2021-2022):** Tensions began to surface, particularly over key appointments and policy directions. A major point of contention was the appointment of the Director-General of Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) in October 2021. While the Prime Minister is constitutionally the appointing authority, the military traditionally has a strong say. The delay in notification for Lt. Gen. Nadeem Anjum's appointment, reportedly preferred by the Army Chief, General Qamar Javed Bajwa, over PM Khan's choice, highlighted the friction. This incident underscored the military's assertion of its institutional prerogative. * **Economic Challenges:** The PTI government's struggles with the economy, including high inflation and a growing debt crisis, also contributed to a decline in its popularity and potentially strained its relationship with the military, which often views economic stability as crucial for national security. * **No-Confidence Motion (April 2022):** The ultimate culmination of these tensions was the successful no-confidence motion against Imran Khan in April 2022. While the military officially maintained neutrality, many analysts believe its withdrawal of support was instrumental in the government's collapse. Khan himself accused the U.S. of orchestrating his removal with local collaborators, a claim rejected by both the U.S. and the Pakistani military. However, the military's public statement that it was "neutral" was seen by many as a significant shift from its previous perceived support. **Facts/Quotes:** * **Imran Khan's accusation (April 2022):** After his ouster, Imran Khan frequently stated, "The establishment decided to be neutral, and that is how the government fell." This implicitly points to the military's decisive role in his removal by *not* intervening to save his government. * **Military's official stance:** Major General Babar Iftikhar, then DG ISPR, stated in April 2022 that the military had "absolutely no role" in the political developments. However, this statement itself was widely interpreted as the military signalling its non-support for Khan's government. ### Post-2022 Developments Following Imran Khan's ouster, a coalition government led by the Pakistan Democratic Movement (PDM) came to power. This period has been marked by increased political instability, a deepening economic crisis, and a more overt confrontation between Imran Khan and the military establishment. * **Political Polarization:** Imran Khan launched a country-wide protest movement, repeatedly criticizing the military establishment for its perceived role in his removal and for allegedly interfering in politics. He specifically named senior military officials, an unprecedented move for a former Prime Minister. * **Crackdown on PTI:** The state, including law enforcement agencies, has taken a strong stance against PTI protests and leaders. The events of May 9, 2023, where PTI supporters attacked military installations after Khan's arrest, marked a severe escalation. The military vowed to bring those responsible to justice under military laws, signalling a zero-tolerance policy. * **Media Censorship and Dissent:** There has been a noticeable tightening of space for dissent and critical reporting, particularly concerning the military. Journalists, activists, and even political figures who criticize the establishment have faced legal action or other forms of pressure. * **Economic Crisis:** The economic situation has worsened, leading to an increasing reliance on international financial institutions (IMF) and friendly countries. The military's influence in economic policy, particularly through bodies like the Special Investment Facilitation Council (SIFC), has become more pronounced, as it seeks to attract foreign investment. * **Appointment of Army Chief:** General Asim Munir was appointed Chief of Army Staff (COAS) in November 2022. This appointment, while constitutional, is always a critical moment in Pakistani politics, often reflecting the current state of civil-military understanding. **Facts/Quotes:** * **May 9, 2023 Incident:** The attacks on military installations, including the General Headquarters (GHQ) in Rawalpindi and the Corps Commander's House in Lahore, were unprecedented. The military leadership termed it a "black day" and vowed to try perpetrators under the Army Act. * **General Asim Munir's statement (Dec 2022):** Upon assuming command, COAS General Munir emphasized that "the armed forces will remain committed to upholding the constitution of the country." While a standard statement, in the current context, it implicitly reinforces the military's perceived role as an ultimate arbiter. * **Human Rights Watch (2023 Report):** HRW noted a "sharp deterioration in human rights" in Pakistan, citing "arbitrary arrests, enforced disappearances, and restrictions on freedom of expression," often linked to political dissent and criticism of the military. ### Factors Sustaining Military Influence Several interconnected factors contribute to the military's enduring influence: * **National Security Paradigm:** The constant threat perception, particularly from India and internal extremism, legitimizes the military's dominant role in national affairs. * **Weak Civilian Institutions:** Civilian political parties often suffer from internal divisions, lack of institutional memory, corruption, and an inability to deliver effective governance, creating a vacuum that the military often fills. * **Economic Power:** The military maintains significant economic interests through its foundations (e.g., Fauji Foundation, Army Welfare Trust), which are involved in various sectors from banking to fertilizer production. This economic footprint gives it a vested interest in policy stability. * **Judicial Acquiescence:** Historically, the judiciary has often validated military takeovers through the "doctrine of necessity," though there have been instances of judicial resistance. * **Public Perception:** A segment of the public, disillusioned with civilian politicians, views the military as more disciplined, patriotic, and capable of governance, especially in times of crisis. * **Strategic Depth Doctrine:** The military's historical pursuit of "strategic depth" in Afghanistan and its role in regional geopolitics (e.g., China-Pakistan Economic Corridor - CPEC) extend its influence beyond traditional defense matters. ### Challenges and Outlook The current trajectory of civil-military relations in Pakistan presents significant challenges for democratic consolidation: * **Deepening Political Crisis:** The severe polarization between the PTI and the ruling coalition, coupled with the military's perceived involvement, risks further destabilizing the political system. * **Economic Vulnerability:** The ongoing economic crisis could either force greater civilian-military cooperation or further expose the limitations of governance, potentially increasing military oversight in economic policy. * **Human Rights Concerns:** The crackdown on dissent and the use of military courts for civilians (post-May 9) raise serious human rights concerns and could alienate parts of the population. * **External Perception:** International partners and financial institutions often view Pakistan's political instability and military's overt role as risks, impacting foreign investment and aid. The long-term outlook for a truly civilian-led democracy in Pakistan remains challenging. While direct military coups have become less frequent due to international pressure and domestic public opinion, the military's "hybrid" influence, operating from behind the scenes, continues to be a defining feature of Pakistani politics. The ability of civilian institutions to assert their constitutional authority, coupled with the military's willingness to genuinely retreat from political engineering, will be crucial for the future of Pakistan's democracy.