In a recent interview with NHS Media, Dr Farhan Hanif Siddiqi, Associate Professor in the School of Politics and International Relations at Quaid-e-Azam University Islamabad, explored the intricate topic of Civil-Military Relations in Pakistan.
Key Points
- The dynamic influence of civil society plays a significant role in Pakistan’s hybrid democracy, shaping the ebb and flow of political dynamics.
- Economic challenges amplify the divide between civilian and military realms, posing additional hurdles for those in power.
- The need for comprehensive reforms is imperative and they are important in addressing Pakistan’s intertwined political and economic challenges.
- The unity and consensus among political elites stand out as pivotal factors in maintaining stability and effective governance in the nation.
Dr. Siddiqi commenced the discussion by addressing the hybrid system and the current political landscape of Pakistan. He referred to his recent chapter in his book, emphasizing that the essence of Civil-Military Relations in Pakistan centers around the enduring dominance of the military institution. Whether in power or not, the military’s influence remains profound, even extending to periods when they are not directly controlling the political system. However, this conventional notion of military control has been challenged in his work. Dr. Siddiqi argued that portraying civilian actors as submissive and weak in the face of military authority is an oversimplification. He highlighted instances of civilian resilience, particularly after 2008, where examples like the repeal of Article 52A (B) and the significant 18th Amendment demonstrated civilian politicians’ efforts to assert their influence.
He also underscored the importance of examining the hybrid democracy concept. Dr. Siddiqi noted that the vitality of an active civil society and how hybrid democracy was evident during PTI’s tenure in power. However, criticism and vocal opposition, underscoring the dynamism of the civilian space and its democratic elements, have marked the subsequent years.
In discussing horizontal and vertical axes of competition within civil society, Dr. Siddiqi differentiated between elite-level horizontal competition and vertical competition based on public legitimacy. Horizontal competition involves resource distribution, appointments, and power struggles between civilian political and military figures. Notably, financial resource allocation has been a contentious issue, as demonstrated by discussions around the “Bajwa doctrine” and financial resentment. The vertical axis, on the other hand, examines who garners more public legitimacy, leading to a paradox within hybrid democracy: the balance between responding to the will of the people versus the establishment. Striking this balance becomes crucial for political parties’ survival and electoral success.
Turning to the military’s economic interests and their impact on civil-military relations, Dr. Siddiqi highlighted the last few years as pivotal. Economic downturns and recessions have exacerbated the civil-military divide, particularly when those in power must address grave economic challenges. The economic troubles faced by Pakistan, including soaring food inflation and the limited macroeconomic improvements from projects like CPEC, reveal deeper structural issues that demand attention.
Dr. Siddiqi discussed the need for structural reforms in the political and economic spheres to address these challenges effectively. He stressed that political elites must exhibit collective unity and develop a minimum consensus on how to approach and manage Pakistan’s political system. Ensuring the fundamental parameters of democracy, stability, and the active participation of civil society is essential. Furthermore, Dr. Siddiqi encouraged cohesiveness between political parties to achieve a stable and effective political system.
Dr. Farhan Hanif Siddiqi provided an insightful exploration of the complexities surrounding Civil-Military Relations in Pakistan. From debunking conventional notions of military control to examining economic interests and suggesting reforms, his analysis shed light on the multifaceted dynamics at play in the nation’s political and social landscape.