THE ARMY AND DEMOCRACY OF THE NEIGHBOR-HOOD ))))))) The Pakistan military believes parliamentary democracy is inappropriate for the country and sees itself as its saviour )))))))) The central dilemma that Aqil Shah grapples with in this deeply-researched work is Pakistan’s “persistent inability to establish democratic civil-military relations”, resulting in the military swinging pendulum-like between governorship and guardianship of the country. That stands in sharp contrast to neighbouring India with whom it shares a similar historical inheritance. Pakistan was not preordained toward military authoritarianism, any more than India was pre-destined to be a constitutional democracy. But, says Shah, Pakistan’s formative experience and its nation-building problems under conditions of geopolitical insecurity, shaped the military’s tutelary beliefs and norms justifying authoritarian expression of its role in state and society. More than any other factor, Shah asserts, “the conflict with India shaped the initial trajectory of Pakistan’s civil-military relations”. A decade of political skirmishing between the Indian National Congress and the Muslim League preceding partition convinced the leadership of newly-created Pakistan that India would never reconcile itself to the existence of the separate nation. Hostilities over Kashmir soon after partition heightened these existential fears and security gained primacy amongst nation-building priorities. With the importance of the army for safeguarding hard-earned nationhood underscored at so early a stage, the military’s ascendance was inexorable. The Pakistan army, like the Indian, was schooled in the British tradition to maintain high professional standards and distance from politics. However, as early as in 1951, a group of Pakistan army officers, supported by some civilians including, notably, the editor of the Pakistan Times, Faiz Ahmed Faiz, hatched the Rawalpindi conspiracy, to seize political control. Led by Major General Akbar Khan, the failed coup reflected the army’s growing distrust of politicians — exacerbated by its perception of the latter’s capitulation to India on the Kashmir issue — and its conviction that survival of the Pakistani state depended on the military. By 1958, the concept of takeover to safeguard the larger national interest had become embedded in the “army’s DNA”.
Posted on: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 05:18:25 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015