close
Thursday March 28, 2024

Civil-military imbalance

The ISPR press release after the corps commanders meeting, has generated unnecessary controversy over civil-military relations. It has surprised many, especially in the backdrop of the frequent huddles between the military and civilian leaderships on the challenges faced by the country. We had thought that the traditional civil-military imbalance was

By Malik Muhammad Ashraf
November 20, 2015
The ISPR press release after the corps commanders meeting, has generated unnecessary controversy over civil-military relations. It has surprised many, especially in the backdrop of the frequent huddles between the military and civilian leaderships on the challenges faced by the country.
We had thought that the traditional civil-military imbalance was gradually giving way to participative decision-making on national issues as well as a sense of collective responsibility, especially pertaining to the security domain.
Before indulging into the anatomy and timing of the press release, I would like to address the draft which seemed to convey an entirely different meaning than the inferred interpretation. For example, the lines: “Progress of National Action Plan’s implementation, finalisation of Fata reform, and concluding all ongoing JITs at priority, were highlighted as issues which could undermine the effects of operations”.
The meaning that these lines convey is that these positive changes could scuttle the gains made by the operations. If it were meant to convey the message that is being inferred by analysts and commentators, the draft would have been worded as: “Slow progress in the implementation of NAP, delay in the finalisation of the Fata reforms, and not giving priority to the finalisation of the JITs, were highlighted as issues that could undermine the effects of operations”.
With regard to the need for issuing a press release, even if the military commanders had felt some inadequacies or slackness on the part of the provincial and federal governments in certain identified issues and had discussed them in the meeting, they should not have made their reservations public. There are several other forums available to do so.
These issues must have also been discussed during the high-level meeting presided by the prime minister a day earlier. This meeting was attended by the COAS, DG ISI and other high-ranking officials of the military. Moreover, the government is generally more than responsive to the input given by military commanders and has shown its willingness for a consultative process and collective decision-making. The frequent interaction between the COAS and DG ISI on issues relating to military operations and the implementation of NAP are a testimony to this effect.
Regardless of whether it was intentional or not, the indiscretion of issuing a press release has undoubtedly embarrassed the government and sent the wrong message to the international community. Furthermore, it has resulted in an unnecessary debate on civil-military relations at a time when all the institutions of the state need to exhibit impregnable unity to tackle the formidable challenges confronting the country. This is not the time to indulge in blame-game, particularly by an institution that is subordinate to the government according to the constitution.
The collateral fallout of this indiscretion is that it has regenerated the controversy on the role of military dictators and their associates in pushing the country on to the precipice it finds itself at today. However, it is difficult to contradict the assertions that both military dictators and civilian leaders are responsible for the mess that the country is in at the moment. Both have myriads of skeletons in their cupboards.
The civilian leadership is rightly blamed for its failure to improve governance, while the military leadership is partially responsible for destroying state institutions and the constitution. The result of the latter included the complication of the process of reforms for good governance. In fact, terrorism and sectarianism, which are an existentialist threat to the country, are gifts of military dictators and their policies.
Military coups have also created a culture of patronage of civilian leadership by the military commanders leading to the latter’s encroachment of civilian territory and an impulsive propensity to arm-twist. This has also been mentioned in the Charter of Democracy, signed by Nawaz Sharif and the late Benazir Bhutto.
It is feared that the continuation of this attitude among the top echelons of the army is against the spirit of the constitution, the advice of Quaid-e-Azam, and a breach of the oath that army officers are required to take at the time of their commissioning. It is, therefore, imperative for all state institutions to respect the constitution. Otherwise the country will find it difficult to achieve its cherished goals. It has already suffered due to the unconstitutional shenanigans of state institutions and it cannot afford the continuation of the same culture.
Governance can improve in an environment of harmony among different state institutions. It is also their collective responsibility to work towards facilitating public-friendly governance. The people of Pakistan have great respect for the army as an institution because they believe it can take the country out of the quagmire of terrorism. Furthermore, they duly acknowledge the sacrifices made by army personnel in the fight against terrorism.
In fact, as observed by the COAS, the people of Pakistan also fully support Operation Zarb-e-Azb. However, what people do not appreciate is the interference of army generals in matters related to running state affairs because they are wary of the unenviable rules of previous military dictators, among the most tyrannical and unpopular rulers in the nation’s history.
The success of the military operation and NAP will depend on collective efforts in removing the conceived hurdles under the stewardship of the civilian leadership. Granted, there are difficulties in implementing the agenda of NAP because of administrative and legal impediments as well as the social, religious and political sensitivities involved. Tackling these problems will require intelligence and careful planning on the part of the leadership. The baggage of the last six decades cannot be cast off by being restive. There is a need to overcome these hurdles under the legal and constitutional framework with perseverance and unruffled commitment.
The actions taken by the army to combat terrorism are commendable, but they should continue in accordance with our constitution and with what Quaid-e-Azam envisioned Pakistan to be. By opting for that route, the army will earn the unfettered respect of the people of Pakistan.
The writer is a freelance contributor.
Email: ashpak10@gmail.com