FalconsForPeace
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2013
- Messages
- 1,132
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
There is a widely held belief among the general public in Pakistan that the army is the ultimate arbiter of what happens in Pakistani politics.
It is thought, for example, that most election results are predetermined by the “agencies” – an oblique reference to the secret service apparatus of the Pakistani defense establishment. The agencies decide who will win and who will lose. And important government decisions especially those related to foreign policy and internal security cannot be made without the army’s tacit consent or approval.
Does the army indeed exercise this level of control over Pakistani politics? It is difficult to affirm or refute this with any reasonable level of confidence. But the more interesting question, and one that perhaps can be answered, is: Why would the army want to interfere?
To understand this one has to understand two sets of people: Those who run the army – the generals. And those who run the civilian administration – the politicians. Politicians first: This is a motley set. They include feudal landlords, hereditary “pirs“- the descendants of long deceased holy men, urban mafiosi, and a spattering of mullahs. This whole set is not usually associated, in the public eye, with integrity, honesty, decency, competence or for that matter patriotism.
The army on the other hand recruits its soldiers from across the social spectrum
The selection process – especially for the officer corps – is competitive and demanding. Only the best survive. In some sense the army is a complete meritocracy – it is “up or out.” If you meet the cut you are promoted to the next rank. If you do not you retire. Hence those who run the army – the top generals – get to where they are on the basis of their merit and competence. Remember also that the army inculcates patriotism in all its soldiers – enlisted men and officers. The message that their raison détre is to defend Pakistan to the last breath is hammered into their minds again and again. In the end, whatever else you say about these men, you cannot say that they are not patriotic.
So on the civilian side, running the country, you have a set of politicians of dubious competence and integrity who get to where they are because of inherited privilege or deception, or coercion, or other even less savory methods. Ask the general public what they think of their politicians patriotism and the response, stripped of expletives, would be that they will happily sell a close family member for a foreign passport.
On the other side are a group of generals who have come up through the ranks based on their competence and professionalism. And etched in their conscience, by virtue of their training, is the paramount importance of protecting Pakistan from any perceived threats.
Now back to the question of why the army would want to interfere in politics: The generals, professional and competent patriots, do not trust the politicians, people of questionable competence, integrity and sincerity, to be faithful to the country. They believe, perhaps not without reason, that if these politicians are left to their own devices they would pose a real and present threat to the integrity and security of Pakistan. And since direct interference for the army is not an option they resort to other means – the agencies – to keep the politicians from doing too much damage.
This is clearly a dysfunctional way to run a democratic country
The politicians should be running the country with the generals focusing exclusively on the army. Running a six hundred thousand man army is difficult enough without the added involvement of keeping a set of dubious politicians in check. The generals would be happy to focus on their own domain and leave the running of the country to elected representatives of the people. But they will not do this until they have confidence that the people’s representatives have the integrity, competence, experience and sincerity to do so.
So we as a country need to try harder to bring into politics people who do have the qualities needed for national leadership. And once we succeed in doing this the army, reassured that the country is in safe hands, will no longer need to be involved in minding the minders.
Why Would Pakistan's Army Interfere in Politics? | Sharnoff's Global Views
It is thought, for example, that most election results are predetermined by the “agencies” – an oblique reference to the secret service apparatus of the Pakistani defense establishment. The agencies decide who will win and who will lose. And important government decisions especially those related to foreign policy and internal security cannot be made without the army’s tacit consent or approval.
Does the army indeed exercise this level of control over Pakistani politics? It is difficult to affirm or refute this with any reasonable level of confidence. But the more interesting question, and one that perhaps can be answered, is: Why would the army want to interfere?
To understand this one has to understand two sets of people: Those who run the army – the generals. And those who run the civilian administration – the politicians. Politicians first: This is a motley set. They include feudal landlords, hereditary “pirs“- the descendants of long deceased holy men, urban mafiosi, and a spattering of mullahs. This whole set is not usually associated, in the public eye, with integrity, honesty, decency, competence or for that matter patriotism.
The army on the other hand recruits its soldiers from across the social spectrum
The selection process – especially for the officer corps – is competitive and demanding. Only the best survive. In some sense the army is a complete meritocracy – it is “up or out.” If you meet the cut you are promoted to the next rank. If you do not you retire. Hence those who run the army – the top generals – get to where they are on the basis of their merit and competence. Remember also that the army inculcates patriotism in all its soldiers – enlisted men and officers. The message that their raison détre is to defend Pakistan to the last breath is hammered into their minds again and again. In the end, whatever else you say about these men, you cannot say that they are not patriotic.
So on the civilian side, running the country, you have a set of politicians of dubious competence and integrity who get to where they are because of inherited privilege or deception, or coercion, or other even less savory methods. Ask the general public what they think of their politicians patriotism and the response, stripped of expletives, would be that they will happily sell a close family member for a foreign passport.
On the other side are a group of generals who have come up through the ranks based on their competence and professionalism. And etched in their conscience, by virtue of their training, is the paramount importance of protecting Pakistan from any perceived threats.
Now back to the question of why the army would want to interfere in politics: The generals, professional and competent patriots, do not trust the politicians, people of questionable competence, integrity and sincerity, to be faithful to the country. They believe, perhaps not without reason, that if these politicians are left to their own devices they would pose a real and present threat to the integrity and security of Pakistan. And since direct interference for the army is not an option they resort to other means – the agencies – to keep the politicians from doing too much damage.
This is clearly a dysfunctional way to run a democratic country
The politicians should be running the country with the generals focusing exclusively on the army. Running a six hundred thousand man army is difficult enough without the added involvement of keeping a set of dubious politicians in check. The generals would be happy to focus on their own domain and leave the running of the country to elected representatives of the people. But they will not do this until they have confidence that the people’s representatives have the integrity, competence, experience and sincerity to do so.
So we as a country need to try harder to bring into politics people who do have the qualities needed for national leadership. And once we succeed in doing this the army, reassured that the country is in safe hands, will no longer need to be involved in minding the minders.
Why Would Pakistan's Army Interfere in Politics? | Sharnoff's Global Views
