Introduction.
·
Healthy civil military relations contribute alot
to enhance the efficiency of a nation. In open societies civil establishment
and military institutes work in hand and gloves with political government; where
political government is having the final control on national decisions.
Although, in developed democracies incidences of military over step their powers
is common. In 1986 Indian Army Chief planned to convert Army exercise into
operation on Pakistan without the knowledge of Indian prime minister, moreover,
removal of ISAF command Gen McChrystal from Afghanistan on the pretext that his
conduct could undermine civilian control over military are few examples from
present time. Civil military relation is
sharing a balance between both the institutions with in their limits without
derailing the political process.
·
Pakistan since its creation has witnessed very
dominating military relations with civil government, where the military take
overs were common. Political scholars believe that, major causes of military
interventions are political and such interventions are primarily due to
weakness in political setup rather than desires of military institutions. So far there has been four military coups in
Pakistan; starting from Gen Ayub Khan and last one by Gen Musharraf. Derailing
of legitimately elected political government cannot be beneficial for Pakistan,
it is important to analyze factors which are contributing in military takeover
in Pakistan.
Conceptual boundaries. Analyze the reasons for civil military imbalance in
Pakistan and review present power sharing between civil and military
institutions. In the end recommend viable measures to eradicate causes of this
imbalance.
Scope.
- · Weakness in Political System
- · Civil Military relation after 2008 elections.
- · Recommendations
Analysis of weaknesses in Political system. As it is widely believed by political
experts that military interventions and takeover are mainly caused due to
weaknesses in political system and not because of the social characteristics of
military institutions. Therefore following are few weaknesses which have become glaring in the past.
- · Lack of political leadership. Quaid-e- Azam died very shortly after the creation of Pakistan, after him Liquat Ali Khan took of the leadership of Pakistan, but after he was shot they was no other prominent political in the screen of Pakistani politics. Pakistan resorted upon Bureaucrats and military generals. Moreover, due to frequent military coups political environment was not created in the country to flourish new leadership.
- · Nonexistence of Political parties. Pakistan Muslim League, which played pivotal role in creation of Pakistan, was deficient of politicians as most of them preferred to stay in Union of India. Feudalists, industrialist and bureaucrats were remained as the only option. These newly generated/ created politicians were unable to inject political / ethical and administrative norms in Pakistan politics. Once they were in assemblies, were unable to for see the power vacuum they were creating due to internal rifts.
- · Frail institutions. After partition, whatever share Pakistan received from armed forces, bureaucracy, judiciary and other elements was already in bits and pieces. Pakistan was also lacking secretariat, courts, parliament and other set ups which are important for functioning of government were not fully established. Pakistan had to start from scratch and thereby institutional discipline, norms and cohesion had to be developed. One such case was refusal of Army Chief to send troops to Kashmir to stop Indian aggression as ordered by then Governor General Quaid-e-Azam.
- · Dependency of Civil over Military. Being deprived of all other institutions, Pakistan Government had to resort on its military components for all civil matter, either it was related to security of people coming from India or helping people of Pakistan against natural calamities. In one way or another, Civil Government handicap towards army become more obvious with every coming day.
Civil Military relations after 2008 elections. Political and social picture of Pakistan
would remain incomplete without taking in to account the military dominance and
its role. Gen Ashfaq Pervez Kayani has supported civil government and his actions
speak better than words. However, it is obvious that this state institution is
having the capacity, experience and power to overshadow any democratic
government. So what are the factors,
which are stopping present military setup? Major factors are explained in
detail as under:-
·
Restoring
Military Image. After
2007, Army was more concerned to improve its image in general public. A direct
military action was out of question, even though loud and vivid political
signals were available.
·
Large
Scale proliferation of political activities. Since 2007, social and political activities were at large,
restoration of Chief Justice of Supreme Court, probing of Benazir Murder Case
was in high tone, and more or less political activities were accelerating in high
pace. This all created a difficult situation for military or bureaucracy to
show direct involved in Government affairs.
· Civil military hand shake for War Against
Terrorism. Pakistan Army was
actively involved in War against terrorism, and nation consensus was essential
to provide national power to military efforts, moreover civil government was
also in need to continue these operations. So keeping a civil military
equilibrium was a Win-Win situation.
 |
| Supreme Court of Pakistan |
·
Complex
dynamics of military Coup. Gen
Ashfaq Pervez Kayani remained firm and provided constitutional and democratic
support to government despite “memo gate scandal” . Public mood was not in
favor of any military intervention, free media and complex national/
international crisis doesn’t advocate such a venture.
· Hyperactive
Judiciary. Above all, any adventure
would turn into misadventure, as it was clear that it would not be supported or
promoted by judiciary. Hyper active stance of Chief Justice and suffering from
last coup were not diminished from his memories.
Recommendations. It
is well established fact Pakistan cannot sustain derailing of any democratic
government. Few recommendations to ward
off this threat in future are as under:-
- · Overlapping decades of dictatorship and elected government had already crippled the political parties. Military interventions can be reduced by addressing the international/ national security concerns of Armed Forces and viable solutions should be worked out mutually.
- · Political parties should follow party code of conduct, where discipline of party members should be scrutinized strictly. Ethnicity, nepotism and religious extremism are required to be flushed out of politics. Strong political parties can provide strong leaders and thereby providing masses a fair choice.
- · National intuitions of security, intelligence, law and order agencies should be strengthen to such a level that calling Armed forces in aid of civil power could be minimize.
- · Military component is the force to implement political Will. Therefore military operations and national policy should complement each other.
- · Positive dynamic social and political activities without disturbing the states affairs has direct bearing in strengthening the democratic process, which is in itself a strong deterrence to avoid any future military intervention.
- · Free responsible media, strong un biased judiciary and nonpolitical bureaucracy would be essential in keeping the balance in favor of democratic government.
Conclusion. If
the intentions are fair and objective is clear, no doubt Pakistan would
maintain a positive civil military balance, however, process will take its
course. In a healthy free society every institution has its role and cannot be
hijacked by other institutions in spite it may seem the necessity of the time.
