What is Pakistan army aiming for?

In Pakistan, while politicians blame the army for their involvement in politics, the fact is that political parties are responsible for dragging the army into politics.

In Pakistan, civil-military relations have always been unpalatable since General Ayub Khan seized the Presidency from Iskander Mirza in a coup in 1958.

There has been a deficit of trust between politicians and the army. Politicians blame the army for their involvement in politics to make them failures. But the fact of the matter is that political parties in Pakistan drag the army into politics. Politicians invite the army to settle political differences amongst themselves. In his book 'Friends Not Masters', General Ayub has mentioned, "Politicians started making contacts with certain members of the armed forces. They were spreading all kinds of rumours to isolate senior officers and create a group of army officers to support them in the pursuit of their ambition."

The political history is witness to the account that none of the Prime Ministers of Pakistan have completed their tenure in the last 75 years. Pakistan remained under martial law regimes in 1958, 1969, and 1977 followed by the 1999 coup.

The polarising politics is the state of affairs in Pakistan and thus a potential threat to national security and could lead to a civil war and destabilise the country. Besides, politicians abuse each other, and even families are not spared and are not ready to accept each other. Here again, the respective political parties approach the army to settle their political issues in the rumbling political scenario.

At present, the civil government is as weak as the previous governments. Constitutionally, the military has no political role, but the situation invites them. Thus every coup-maker abrogates the Constitution and issues its replacement in terms of provisional constitutional order (PCO). In Pakistan's 23rd constitutional amendments have provided the military with military courts to try civilians for terrorism. Indeed, the military courts point to the comparative weakness of other state institutions, particularly parliament and the judiciary. In the given circumstances, the military is a powerful actor and the civil government a weaker one, as a result of that political parties do not confront the army.

Now it is to be watched how Pakistan's new army chief General Asim Munir will behave with political parties. This is an open fact that none of the Pakistan's 22 prime ministers has completed a full term, and is well-known by Shehbaz Sharif. His elder brother Nawaz, a three-time former prime minister, appointed Pervez Musharraf army chief in 1998, then was toppled by him in a coup. In 2016, Nawaz appointed General Bajwa and, allegedly at the army chief's behest, was duly stripped off his office by the Supreme Court and banned from politics for life. The most important task for General Munir would be to restore the trust of the army with the public damaged by continued malicious campaigns. For several years, the Pakistan army has been the target of much criticism by political parties, politicians, and their social media brigades.

(R C Ganjoo is a senior journalist and columnist having more than 30 years experience of covering issues concerning national security, particularly Kashmir. He has worked with several prominent media groups and his articles have been published in many national and international publications.)

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are the personal opinions of the author. The facts and opinions appearing in the article do not reflect the views of OneIndia and OneIndia does not assume any responsibility or liability for the same.