The specter of military intervention has long loomed over Pakistan’s political landscape. As the country faces growing political polarization and economic challenges, the question of whether the military will once again play a direct role in governance has become a pressing one. A firm belief of the current government in the military solution as a panacea to Pakistan’s poly-crises is becoming increasingly conspicuous, which is why the military’s omnipresence is evident whether it comes to civilian institutions, policymaking, and execution.
Historically, military regimes have often been seen as a stabilizing force in times of political turmoil or economic crisis. Their ability to impose order, suppress dissent, and implement swift decisions has led many to believe that they can effectively address challenges that civilian governments struggle to overcome. However, with the formation of the modern nation-state system and the advent of the industrial revolution, the role of armed forces has evolved. Constitutional frameworks have increasingly limited the military’s involvement in domestic politics, restricting their primary function to strategic and national security matters. This shift reflects a growing recognition of the importance of civilian control over the military and the potential dangers of allowing the armed forces to wield excessive political power.
Pakistan’s persistent adherence to a Praetorian tradition, characterized by the military’s pervasive influence over political affairs, has hindered its efforts to establish a sustainable democratic system. This overlapping and often incompatible relationship between the civilian government and the military has led to a cycle of crises, from policy conflicts and institutional overlap to economic disruption and social tensions. The factors contributing to this enduring reliance on the military include historical legacy, security concerns, economic interests, and the prevalence of patronage and clientelism in Pakistani politics.
The entrenched political elites in Pakistan, who have virtually monopolized national politics for over four decades, remain hopelessly fragmented. Ironically, their factionalism is not rooted in substantive ideological or conceptual divergences. In fact, rival political factions have established an unspoken consensus on broader economic and political fundamentals. Both have embraced the neoliberal economic agenda and have vied to be more amenable to the security establishment, which they perceive as the de facto arbiter of power.
Despite their shared economic and political principles, the ruling coalition and the opposition party remain at loggerheads due to their differing perceptions of their relationships with the military establishment. While the ruling coalition has enjoyed a period of unchallenged power by effectively deferring to the establishment, the opposition party, despite its leader’s revolutionary rhetoric, has been sidelined and remains politically marginalized.
The recent crackdown marks the latest phase in the cat and mouse chase to retain the power struggle between Imran Khan’s PTI and the authorities.
“At best this is a dangerous distraction,” says Michael Kugelman, director of the South Asia Institute at the Wilson Centre think tank in Washington. “But at worst, it could be something that destabilizes the country even more. It makes it all the more difficult to address Pakistan’s economic and security challenges.” Mr. Kugelman characterized this as a “disturbing development” from the military’s perspective, suggesting that the institution may have resorted to tactics that were “excessive and undoubtedly undemocratic.”
Faced with a new type of threat posed by online activism, the military has responded with an aggressive and authoritarian approach. The government has imposed restrictions on internet access, including the introduction of firewalls and the banning of social media platforms like Twitter. This crackdown has resulted in significant economic losses of millions and has been widely seen as an attempt to curtail the influence of the opposition party, particularly its supporters based abroad who frequently criticize the military online.
The prolonged political clashes are exacerbating the country’s instability. As Mehmal Sarfraz, a Lahore-based political commentator and journalist, observes, “When political parties clash, a third force benefits.” Many analysts believe that this third force is the military, which has a long history of involvement in Pakistan’s politics. While the military’s influence over civilian governments has fluctuated over time, many analysts now see its hand in numerous political decisions and restrictions.
The current political crises in Pakistan demand urgent attention due to several factors. First, it is characterized by an unprecedented level of polarization between the ruling coalition and the opposition, with both sides resorting to extreme measures to gain political advantage. Second, the involvement of the military in the political process, albeit indirectly, continues to be a significant factor, complicating the situation and raising concerns about the country’s democratic trajectory. Third, the economic challenges facing Pakistan, including high inflation, unemployment, and a looming debt crisis, have exacerbated the political tensions and increased the stakes for all parties involved. The confluence of these factors has created a complex and volatile political environment that is unlike anything Pakistan has experienced in recent decades.
Many fear that once these new restrictions are implemented, it will be difficult to reverse them. As one analyst warned, “With each passing day, we risk becoming less of a democracy and more of a hybrid regime.” This concern stems from the historical precedent of authoritarian governments using crises to justify the erosion of civil liberties and democratic norms. Once these measures are in place, it can be challenging to dismantle them, even after the initial threat has subsided.
The tinderbox of Pakistan’s political landscape is poised to ignite, fueled by a dangerous combination of factors; To begin with, the deep-seated political polarization could ignite violent protests or clashes between supporters of opposing factions. Ultimately, the involvement of the military, even indirectly, could escalate tensions and potentially lead to a direct intervention, as has been the precedent historically. Furthermore, the economic challenges facing Pakistan, including high inflation and unemployment, could exacerbate social unrest and provide fertile ground for radicalization. In addition, the country’s nuclear arsenal, while under strict safeguards, remains a potential source of concern in a highly volatile political environment. Any breakdown in law and order could increase the risk of unauthorized access to nuclear materials or technology. Finally, the international community’s response to the crisis could further complicate the situation. If foreign powers become more deeply involved, it could exacerbate tensions and potentially lead to proxy conflicts. Unless a path to de-escalation is found the only viable way to prevent a catastrophic outcome is for all stakeholders to exercise restraint and prioritize dialogue over confrontation.
To course correct and establish a more stable and democratic Pakistan, the government must prioritize three critical areas. First off, the faltering economy requires urgent attention. Reversing economic decline, addressing inflation, and promoting sustainable growth are essential for improving the lives of citizens and fostering political stability. Subsequently, the rule of law and justice system must be reformed to ensure fairness, transparency, and accountability. A strong and independent judiciary is vital for upholding democratic principles and protecting the rights of citizens and act as a check on the government’s power and safeguard democratic norms.
The use of legal tactics to stifle opposition, particularly through high-profile arrests of lawmakers, will only exacerbate public cynicism and evoke memories of our authoritarian past. Such actions are reminiscent of the draconian measures employed by previous regimes to suppress dissent. The current path all stakeholders are on is a recipe for disaster. Political arrests, inflammatory rhetoric, and a complete lack of genuine dialogue are fueling tensions and creating a toxic political environment. This hostile atmosphere is a far cry from the constructive engagement that is essential for resolving Pakistan’s deep-rooted challenges.
To avoid a further slide into instability, Pakistan must prioritize a path that fosters dialogue, inclusivity, and democratic norms. The current trajectory, characterized by political arrests, divisive rhetoric, and a lack of genuine engagement, is a recipe for disaster.
Only by embracing a more constructive and democratic approach can the country hope to overcome its challenges and build a more stable, prosperous, and just future. Pakistan must prioritize political reconciliation, economic reforms, and the strengthening of democratic institutions. This requires a commitment to dialogue, compromise, and a shared vision for the nation’s future.
