The Civil-Military Divide in Pakistan in the wake of Pandora Leaks

 

What is the Pakistan Army’s role in the multiple crises that have swept the country since independence? Never before was this question more relevant than in the wake of the Pandora Leaks. The scandal implicates 700 Pakistanis in various types of corruption cases ranging from owning offshore companies,  properties in Pakistan and overseas, money laundering, and questionable bank accounts.  The accused belong to all shades of life, including some senior defence forces personnel.

This article attempts at analyzing  the evolution of  the role of Pakistan’s armed forces in the society

Pakistan’s response to the situation in Jammu & Kashmir, soon after independence, was determined by a civil government, which found itself incapable of launching an overt military invasion of the disputed state and was thus constrained to seek help from non-state actors. The  Pakistan Army's role in this conflict remained confined to seconding two of its officers to a ghost headquarters covertly set up with the blessings of Pakistan’s Prime Minister for planning, preparation, and execution of the secret war in J&K. It also sent some of its officers on leave to provide leadership to the infiltrators.  The Pakistan Army was fully involved in the conflict in the spring of 1948 when the Indian Army was threatening to advance beyond Line Uri-Poonch- Naushera. This was how the Indo-Pakistan hostility paradigm was framed.

During the Cold War era, Pakistan was the only country in the so-called “Free World” where the political government had the serving army chief (General Muhammad Ayub Khan) double as the country’s defence minister. Behind the Iron Curtain, Marshall Grechko of the Soviet Union held this honour.

Ayub Khan was catapulted to become the defence minister by various power factions within the cabinet who had wanted to use his position in the perpetual power struggle that haunted the corridors of power during the 1950s. This pattern was refined during the decade spanning the period between the end of the First Kashmir War and the imposition of martial law in 1958.

In an earlier article, “The Autumn Cloudburst”, I had written:

Ayub Khan came to power in October 1958, a decade before he was ousted from office. He was the first military ruler of Pakistan. Ayub’s ascent to power was the culmination of more than a decade of musical chairs. Between August 1947 and October 1958, there were seven prime ministers in Pakistan.

In October 1958, Iskander Mirza, Pakistan’s first civilian president, abrogated the constitution, declared martial law, and appointed Ayub Khan as the Chief Martial Law Administrator and Prime Minister. Some two weeks later, Ayub Khan dismissed Iskander Mirza and became the President. In 1962, Ayub lifted the martial law, gave the country a presidential constitution, and became a civilian president.  

Abrogation of the constitution was hailed by a majority of politicians. When Maulvi Tamizuddin, the national assembly speaker, tried to challenge the Martial  Law in the Supreme Court of Pakistan, he was physically stopped from doing so. However, Tamizuddin reached the Supreme Court, hiding in a rickshaw, and filed the petition. In its verdict, the Supreme Court upheld the abrogation of the constitution by invoking the "Law of Necessity". 

 During his almost eleven-year rule, Ayub Khan gave political stability to Pakistan, introduced agricultural reforms by reducing the size of landholdings, modernized the family laws, and ushered in an era of industrialization. 

People, both inside and outside Pakistan, criticize Ayub Khan for imposing dictatorship behind the façade of civilian rule. The major accusations against Ayub Khan are: 1) Replacing the parliamentary system of government with one based on presidential form in which the president was indirectly elected by an electoral college; 2) Muzzling the press and throttling political dissent;3) Plunging the country into the hazardous 1965 war which created a sense of isolation and insecurity among the Bengalis, leading to the secession of East Pakistan. 

In retrospect, one may ask Ayub Khan's critics:  

• Did reverting to the parliamentary system after Ayub Khan's ouster in 1969 bring any improvement in governance?
• Had the media, during the last half a century after Ayub's ouster, free from coercion by various governments?
• Did Ayub Khan plunge the country into the 65 War, or was it Bhutto, who, as foreign minister, assured Ayub that the operations in IHK will not result in India attacking across the international border? 

Pakistani politicians have a love-hate relationship with the armed forces. While leveling accusations against military interventions, the critics forget that the 1956 constitution was abrogated by a civilian president - Iskander Mirza. 

At partition, the Pakistan Army was not the formidable force it later evolved into. In 1947, Pakistan had only two infantry divisions, 7 Division & 9 Division in the West, and an infantry brigade in the East. The army was struggling to raise an armoured brigade by exchanging a squadron of Spitfire fighter aircraft for tanks with India. That bargain never materialized because the civil government, in an act of magnanimity, gave the Spitfire aircraft to India without any quid pro quo.

So, why were the Pakistani politicians enamored by the Pakistan Army?

They still are. It is because Pakistani society is a patchwork of tribes, agricultural communities, and artisans, and industrial workers. Every society passes through three stages of evolution - tribal, agricultural, and industrial. Pakistan, during the last half a century, has transitioned from an agricultural economy to a semi-industrialized economy where the services sector plays the predominant role.    However, instead of socially evolving from one stage to another, Pakistani society has, over the last seven decades, regressed into one based the tribal mentality.

As a result of this social regression, Pakistani society has been split up into three main centres of gravity: 1) Politicians; 2) Judiciary;3) Army. There are sub- centres of gravity also like the civil bureaucracy, the business community, the landed aristocracy, media, and the lawyers who, depending upon expediency, hitch their wagon with one of the three predominant centres of gravity. The polarization between these centres of gravity is increasing. What may happen next?

A tribal society gravitates towards the most powerful group, which, in the case of Pakistani society, is the Army. This explains why the politicians are always in competition with their rivals to curry favor with the Army top brass. This also explains why, in the words of a former  Army chief, they haunt the GHQ for toppling their political rivals – both Benazir and Nawaz did this.

The point here is, the civil governments involved the army in politics and then cursed it when it went out of their control. 

What is democracy in the context of Pakistan? There are a few political dynasties ruling the roost. These dynasties control the political parties where there are no internal elections and an inner circle makes all the important appointments. The parties are run like fiefs and the electorate is hoodwinked through false promises and catchy slogans.

Over the last four decades, successive Pakistani governments, following the crony capitalist approach, have destroyed the heavy industry. The industrial enterprises nationalized by Bhutto - Karachi steel mills and Karachi shipyards are but a few examples.   After depleting the country of its industrial assets, the successive political governments have encouraged the emergence of a few cartels which control the entire economy. Presently, the economy is being held hostage to sugar, fertilizer, and textile barons. Most of them are politicians and retired bureaucrats.

The economy of Pakistan, as it stands today, cannot support the armed forces to even maintain a semblance of a viable defensive posture. And this is when the army and the air force are fighting the war on terror as well as keeping more than an eye on the eastern border. In such a situation, when Pakistan’s armed forces are financially hamstrung in meeting their defence needs, they will continue to play a larger-than-life role in the national decision-making process.

What is the present state of affairs? It goes to the credit of Pakistan’s armed forces that, whereas now Indian military budget surpasses Pakistan’s entire budget, the military is keeping the Indian juggernaut at bay by making do with mostly second-hand equipment.

Our Army has bought second-hand gunship helicopters from the United States and rebuilt junk armoured personnel carriers ,received, gratis, from Italy. Our air force needs F-16 Viper (the latest version) to counter India’s French-built Rafale aircraft. Due to lack of funds, and because the US has imposed restrictions on selling the state-of-the-art equipment to Pakistan, it has resorted to buying second-hand, old version F-16s from Jordan and elsewhere. 

The air force keeps re-building its half-century-old Mirages to keep them flying. As for the JF-17, it is an aircraft designed and built with Chinese assistance to beat the future US sanctions. Frankly speaking, the JF-17 is a stop-gap measure till the PAF gets a more advanced aircraft. 

The navy, except for its four Chinese origin frigates was, until recently, making do with two to three decades old hulks. It is now inducting new weapons platforms with Chinese and Turkish help.

Does the fragile economy justify armed forces’ involvement in business activities?

Presently, the armed forces are involved in various types of businesses which mainly include real estate and industrial plants. This, according to the defence top brass, is to provide jobs and homes to retired persons. In the armed forces, people retire earlier than in the civil.

However, the civilians, while most of them live in the DHAs and enjoy the security they would not get in civil housing societies, use the military’s involvement in running businesses as a whip to beat the armed forces.

The military will have to curtail its business activities to the bare minimum in order to deny the wily politicians the excuse to exploit the issue for maligning the armed forces

When the organs of the state, instead of supplementing each other, start fighting and declare themselves above accountability, the country gets fragmented into autonomous zones, each ruled by a warlord. This is what has happened in Afghanistan, Congo, Sierra Leone, and Somalia. 

When a state collapses, foreign armies, in the garb of peacekeeping forces, start arriving. They remain in the fragmented country, supporting one private army or another, fleece the country for a couple of years, and create their respective spheres of influence. Then, after having extracted their pound of flesh, leave the country.

This is what has happened in Afghanistan. As for Somalia, it is still fighting a civil war, even after the UN peacekeeping forces exited in 1995. 

Pakistan needs a strong military to keep its neighborhood secure. And the military has to be properly budgeted and equipped to squarely face the security threat. Those who talk of downsizing the armed forces should understand that to simply defend itself against India, Pakistan needs an army one-third the size of the Indian Army, plain and simple.

The PM has set up a commission that will carry out an across-the-board investigation of the corruption highlighted in the Pandora Leaks. The commission, for sure, will include the financial irregularities committed by some armed forces personnel. Let this not become a witch hunt for political point-scoring.

 

Saleem Akhtar Malik

October 5, 2021

The author is a Pakistan Army veteran who regularly writes on national and international affairs, defence, military history, and military technology. His talks on these subjects are aired on his YouTube Channel "The Observation Post". His blog "Sam1953.blogspot.com" features his articles. Tweets @saleemakhtar53.