Pakistan Military and its Future

The future of Pakistan’s military is dependent on the next-generation of leadership and their social background. It will also be determined in the way the Pakistani military leadership tackles the nuclear-weapons question. India and other countries are keen to know the kind of management policies and the ideological underpinning that will shape the thinking and planning of the officer cadre of Pakistan’s armed forces. It is understood that a large number of junior and middle-ranking officers think differently from higher ranks, have become ideologically conservative, and are sympathetic to the Taliban. However, it will be more important to determine the future of Pakistan’s armed forces in terms of the dominant ideology, capabilities, and political ambitions. It will have wide ramifications for the region as a whole.

It is commonly argued that the military is the only stable organisation in Pakistan and will remain so. General Zia brought an anomaly which will probably not revisit the military. During the nine year tenure of General Pervez Musharraf, a substantial number of the militant elements in the armed forces were purged. The religious or secular flavours are part of the larger national ideology defined by the military itself. It has been witnessed that at times even the most seemingly secular generals have allied with religious extremists and militants to fulfil the military’s strategic goals in pursuance of the national ideology. For instance, the military supported the Taliban government in Afghanistan. These strategic interests seem to have influenced the junior officers in the armed forces. However, the senior leadership is not likely to abandon their style, popularly known as strategic pragmatism. They will continue their partnership with the US and other countries which are considered critical for the military and the country, as allied with the US against Taliban in 2001.

The Pakistan-US relation will remain significant, less for technological reasons and more for the larger interests of the organisation as also political reasons. The access to quality training of the officer cadre in the US and exposure to Western military concepts, including technology and financial resources, are reasons for the continued military-to-military relations between the US and Pakistan. The link between the two countries is also critical due to Pakistan’s  increasing dependence on the US in fighting the war against terror. The military’s capability is being whittled away as a result of its involvement in fighting terror and insurgency operations.

Meanwhile, the Pakistan military is increasingly looking at China and Europe for its weapons. The Pakistan Air Force will increase its technological linkages with Beijing. China possesses relatively less sophisticated-technology consequently Pakistan military would remain a medium-sized military power.

However, this pattern is not common among all three services. The Pakistan Navy will continue its dependency on western equipment along with diversifying through procuring some Chinese technology.

Problems of unsound planning and corruption within the military are some of the reasons for the lack of efficient weapons procurement policy. Over and above, the mediocrity in planning and generalship is an important factor. The lack of capacity in planning also emanates from the fact that the army, which is the largest service of the armed forces, allocates less time on professional work and more on power politics. The military’s continued involvement in politics and its expanded political role has affected professionalism. Thus, military professionalism suffers.

The military has been facing organisational problems. The military’s inability to structure military decision-making and the organisation at large has adversely affected its capability. The current organisational structure does not seem sound. It seems that the organisational deficiencies exist because of the weak civilian control of the armed forces. The civil-military relation remains under stress. Enhancing civilian control of the military is a dream. It might not come true, primarily because the military has emerged as an autonomous institution that jealously guards its capacity to remain a powerful player in the country. In fact, it will not be an exaggeration to argue that, in Pakistan, the military is the state.

The military has also built its economic empire. It will continue to play a dominant role in politics, economy and society in the foreseeable future. Despite revival of democracy in February 2008, the chances of the military re-asserting itself in politics in the future remain high. The March 2009 political crisis and the army chief meetings demonstrate the military’s interest in politics.

The military’s continued involvement in politics would erode professional management at the top. The service chief, especially from the army, is selected on political considerations. The selection of service chiefs, especially the army chief, should be based on the principle of seniority. Such problems influence the military’s performance and professionalism in the long-run. Army Chief Gen Kiyani’s claims that the military can face any challenges, seems hollow. The Pakistani armed forces’ capability to counter internal and external threats remains limited. 

(Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not represent the views either of the Editorial Committee or the Centre for Land Warfare Studies).