Challenging the military’s hegemony

The following article appeared in Daily Times op-ed pages, June 03, 2011 (http://bit.ly/jTnmpq)

On May 1/2, 2011 — depending on where you were in the world at that time! — Pakistanis were once again betrayed. Like many other instances in our short history, this betrayal came again at the hands of our beloved military. The betrayal here is not the fact that a raid by American Navy SEALs into Pakistan to kill Osama bin Laden was a direct challenge to our ever-elusive sovereignty. It lay in the fact that our military establishment continues to pursue policies that directly oppose the well being of our nation. It is rather preposterous to propel the idea that the military establishment was oblivious of Osama’s presence in Abbottabad. It is ridiculous to argue that our pervasive (and invasive) spying agencies had no clue about what was happening under their noses.


In the aftermath of the raid, Taliban militants have struck thrice in Pakistan: in Shabqadar near Nowshera, in Peshawar on the vehicles belonging to the US consulate, and just days ago in Karachi on PNS Mehran. One does not even have to wait to find out the reactions from the official channels. The armed forces and their various spokespersons inform us that the situation is under control and that it is entering its final moments. The civilian government (ostensibly the interior minister) keeps appearing on the media to beg people to get united against the terrorists. In the meanwhile, some story emerges in the media that claims that this or that ministry or department had informed the relevant security agencies a week or two ago about an impending threat or an attack. Yet nothing happens! The militants remain elusive and get more effective in their strikes and the national unity against religious extremism seems to figure nowhere on the horizon.

What the military and the ruling classes have failed to understand is that there cannot be any unified approach to fighting religious extremism and militancy unless the myriad political contradictions present within Pakistan’s federation are resolved first. The Baloch are up in arms against the state for more than five years. They do not want to have any truck with the current state and its military. Each day brings news of Baloch activists disappearing mysteriously, only to be later found dead on the roadside with their bodies either bullet-riddled or with marks of severe torture. If you are a Baloch, why would you even bother to heed the call of the military-political leadership in Islamabad to unite and fight religious militancy? The Baloch are more interested, and rightly so if I may add, to secure political and economic rights over their territory and resources than to help a state that has denied them these rights for six decades. Right now with the situation as it exists, a Baloch has more chances of dying at the hands of the military, ISI, and other agencies than religious militants. In Sindh the disenchantment with the Punjabi-dominated state runs deep. Their disillusionment with the state is again nothing new and their narrative contains similar complaints — of political rights and economic resources denied. They see the current state more as a usurper than as a protector. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa lives under the tyranny unleashed on them in the past one decade by the Taliban and the state alike. People there are perhaps the only ones really looking forward to this mysterious unity against religious militancy.

It is becoming increasingly clear that the military and the ISI are no longer part of the solution — at least not yet. They are part of the very problem that afflicts this country. The military’s India-centric security paradigm and a penchant for jihad have made us vulnerable both internally and externally. Internally, the price of the propping up of our “unconquerable” defence (naqabal-e-taskheer difa!) and pursuing strategic depth in Afghanistan have resulted in a vast majority of the population remaining without basic necessities like education, health, and safety. The military’s most successful achievement over the years has been its complete dominance over any sort of political discourse on the mainstream media. Hence, we find ourselves in the midst of a situation where nobody — be it the mainstream politicians or most of the mainstream media pundits — is willing to challenge the military’s hegemony over the national security agenda. True, we hear from this or that analyst that the military’s grip over our foreign and domestic policies needs to be challenged, yet these voices remain largely isolated and conveniently ignored by the ruling class of the country. That, I would say, is the other achievement of the military establishment in Pakistan. The military no longer commands the political discourse because of the barrel of the gun that it possesses. It has also emerged as a formidable economic and business enterprise over the years in Pakistan. Since Zia’s dictatorship, the military has advanced its political and economic interests simultaneously. The business interest allows the military to maintain the vast network of patronage that is pursued and developed for its own ends and not for the general welfare of its jawans or of the people as commonly purported. The welfare effect now remains a by-product of the vast business empire that the military manages and operates. Its purpose (effectively speaking) is the political control over a coterie of politicians and businessmen that hang on to the military’s coattails.

Externally, the military’s myopic worldview has made us susceptible to all sorts of wrongdoings. We are popularly believed to be a nation of extremists that harbours and fans religious extremism all over the world. Even if it is just a bad stereotype (which it is) we normally find ourselves in a really tight spot to counter the argument that Pakistan has become a magnet for all the crazy jihadists in the world. It is here where they find a conducive environment that allows them to survive and grow (ideologically), coupled with the logistical support for their violent designs for the rest of the world. The ongoing trial of Pakistani-American businessman Dr Tuhawwar Rana in Chicago where David Coleman Headley has become an approver is a case in point. Headley’s revelations detail the involvement of the ISI and al Qaeda and other jihadi organisations in the planning and execution of the 26/11Mumbai attacks. What is generally shocking is how easy it was for Headley, Ilyas Kashmiri and others like them to operate and plan all this from within Pakistan. We may like to live in denial but the reality is that Pakistan is fast becoming (if it already is not) the land that outsiders perceive it to be — a hotbed of jihadi mentality and militancy. In such an environment it becomes increasingly difficult to dissuade external forces from interfering in Pakistan, militarily or otherwise.

Pakistan and Pakistanis find themselves in a space where their choices are fast disappearing. The choices to be made should be as clear as the writing on the wall. But, unfortunately, they are not. We must resolve Pakistan’s inner contradiction as we try to look for unity against religious extremism and militancy. The sooner we realise that challenging the military’s hegemony is just as vital as forcing politicians to do the right thing, the closer we can move to a Pakistan that is just and equitable.


Fahd Ali is studying towards his doctorate in Economics at the New School for Social Research in New York City. He can be reached at fahdali@gmail.com