How many things will the army do?

Islamabad diary
When was the last time a visiting head of state had a separate meeting with Pakistan’s service chiefs? General Headquarters has become a must port of call for important visitors – Afghan president, Iranian foreign minister, other figures. But a full-dress meeting of the service chiefs with the Chinese president in his hotel, with not even the defence minister in on the scene…this was a first, only underscoring the military’s pronounced role in today’s Pakistan.
Security for the Chinese president’s visit was handled completely by the army. When Xi Jinping addressed the joint session of parliament, the 111 Brigade, as was only to be expected, was positioned in and around the building. The army is raising a fresh division consisting of nine battalions, which comes to three brigades, with a strong SSG component, to provide security for the Pak-China economic corridor. Without this security cover the entire concept of the corridor becomes a vague and abstract proposition.
We don’t need to remind ourselves that the war in Fata, the undeclared operation in Balochistan and the Rangers’ operation in Karachi are all army-led enterprises. The army is handling the entire fight against extremism and terrorism, or whatever name we give this phenomenon, with the civilian government making the right noises but not giving much of an impression that its heart and soul are in this undertaking.
Even the hype surrounding the Karachi by-election would not have arisen if the MQM had not been put on the back foot by the Rangers’ operation. Otherwise, it would not have been easy for the PTI and JI to enter much less openly campaign in this quintessential MQM stronghold.
Whose is the major say in all important questions concerning foreign policy? Does the civilian government have any input or say in Afghan policy? Can the civilian government do anything on the Indian front? PM Nawaz Sharif said a few things on the subject soon after entering office but he has been cautious ever since. Our Yemen predicament has arisen from this same military-civilian imbalance – the PM seeming to promise more than he could deliver. This has fuelled Saudi anger which Pakistan is seeking to assuage.
A military-civil imbalance is nothing new in this country. It has always been there and we have said for a long time that the army is the country’s most powerful institution. But this imbalance has become more visible today. Two factors account for this: 1) the civilian side looks if not dysfunctional at least not very competent; and 2) the army because of taking a clear stand on terrorism and going into North Waziristan has acquired a measure of popular support and legitimacy.
The army was always the country’s most powerful institution but the kind of popular approval it enjoys today it never had before. Gen Musharraf was lionised by a section of the liberati when he seized power, the liberati looking upon him as their great liberal hope. But how much popular support and approval did he have? Gen Ziaul Haq was an all-powerful dictator who left a powerful imprint on the national scene. Indeed, Pakistan continues to struggle with the effects of his legacy. He had the backing of religious and conservative elements of society. But what goes by the name of popular approval he could never get.
So what we see today is unprecedented and responsible for it, as already pointed out, is as much the army’s role in taking on terrorism and extremism as civilian lacklustre performance.
This has all happened in the last year and a half. The army did not have much of an approval rating under Gen Kayani who in his second term as army chief seemed to be marking time and going through the motions of leadership rather than taking any risks. But, as is the widespread impression, under Gen Raheel Sharif’s command things have started looking different, the army tackling the Taliban threat head-on, and taking losses in the process, and doing that in Karachi which was almost inconceivable some time back: targeting the MQM in a manner which is hurting it.
The terrorism/extremist threat is nowhere near being eliminated – this will take time – but, despite the odd terrorist incident, things have begun to look up. The fundamental change is that whereas just a year ago there seemed to be no hope, and people when they turned to discuss the national situation would roll their eyes and throw up their hands in despair, that feeling of helplessness has gone. The military’s new-found can-do attitude has thus rubbed off on the country.
(If only this feeling prevailed in Balochistan as well. The mood there is completely different from what it is in the rest of the country. But we seem unconcerned. And the army’s strong-arm approach is only hardening Baloch attitudes. Brahamdagh Bugti’s interview with this paper’s London correspondent, Murtaza Ali Shah, is worth reading. He hasn’t said a thing against Pakistan. His grandfather, Nawab Bugti, was no enemy of the country. He was as good a patriot, if a much better-read one, than most other patriots. Brahamdagh says no one has ever contacted him for talks. Where is the ISI’s vaunted geostrategic vision? If Brahamdagh can be brought in from the cold, half the Baloch problem we currently face would be licked. And by the way, if Balochistan remains restive, it will take more than one army division to control the security situation there.)
At least in one respect we have to be grateful to the Taliban who have compelled the army to return to the ways of soldiering. By Gen Musharraf’s time this had become a chocolate and real-estate army. The war against terrorism has had a transformative effect – making the army battle-hardened. The old army could never do in Tirah and Karachi what this new army is doing.
But the civilian half of the state is not performing well and that should be a cause of concern for all of us. Because the turning we seek, that change in our national fortunes that the more starry-eyed amongst us hope for, will not come unless political performance also improves.
It is not enough for the military to declare war against extremism and terrorism. Our state needs reforming. It needs a new direction. Our different institutions have to improve their performance. Are the Chinese going to come and do something about our primary education? Will they do something about our thanas and patwarkhanas? Will they provide ventilators to our hospitals and improve hospital emergency services? Are they going to come and improve the working of our courts? Will they bring voodoo specialists to cure the mania for prestige projects?
Pakistan had more advantages when it became an independent country than Singapore and Hong Kong did at the time. China was still in the throes of civil war. Malaya was a backward colony, producing only tin and rubber. South Korea was unheard of. There were no East Asian tigers. We had the canals and the railway system and the courts and a strong administrative system. We had the trappings of democracy when much of Asia was still trying to recover from the effects of the Second World War.
And then we set out to become an ideological state, worried more about metaphysical abstracts than the here and now. But mercifully, and again we have to thank the Taliban for this, we have stopped short of the precipice and are trying to retrace our steps. But it is the army in the lead…which is not good. Where is civilian performance?
Another thing…the present cold war with India makes no sense. For our own good we have to have not a kowtowing but a sensible, rational relationship with India…without lowering our guard, it goes without saying, but hopefully without some of the present paranoia. But no improvement with India can happen under weak civilian leadership. The army is remodelling itself on new lines. Let’s hope we get some of the same movement on the civilian side.
Email: bhagwal63@gmail.com